As Paris 2024 kicks off, a complex legal scene is evident as unexpected twists occur following the Opening Ceremony
From a spectator’s perspective, tucked alongside the Pont des Invalides, the Paris 2024 Olympic Games Opening Ceremony was an incredible security success. The 45,000 police officers and AI surveillance systems, explored in my last article on the legal complications with AI, did, in fact, ensure the safety of the hundreds of thousands of spectators. Nonetheless, railways were sabotaged earlier that day and other legal complications arose following the controversial aspects of the Opening Ceremony. Beyond these unique Paris 2024 legal matters, anti-doping efforts backed by the Court of Arbitration for Sport have persisted through the first week of the Games. Paris successfully hosted a safe and international celebration but the controversy and legal scene add complexity and depth to the event.
To reflect back to the last article, leading up to the opening ceremony, people in Paris faced road closures, thousands of police (some coming from as far as Chile), and security cameras that seemed to be living entities. After all, the new AI surveillance software, an exception to the general EU legal framework for AI, would allow security cameras to analyse situations. The average citizen was constantly scanned and their behaviours interpreted, strictly without facial scanning. Even if France’s new law permits the AI algorithms, France must abide by the EU Parliament's rules on AI and not use facial recognition. Legal controversy around AI cameras blurred into the background as the city held its breath for the Opening Ceremony. It was the first to be out in the open and occurred during extremely high threats of terrorism.
The Opening Ceremony
Hours before the ceremony, France awoke to the news that major rail lines had been significantly disrupted due to arson attacks. Largely disrupting travel, this was a breach in security and is an ongoing investigation. This intensified the nerves of the day. According to BBC, “the head of state-owned rail company SNCF, Jean-Pierre Farandou, said whoever was behind the sabotage had targeted intersections on the network to have the most serious impact since, “each fire cut off two lines and damaged critical signalling cables.” The attack was pre-planned and thus too effective in causing widespread disruption.
Hours later, Paris executed the ceremony with flawless security, after months of foiling threats to the Olympics. An Olympic Record was achieved as boats with athletes made their way along the Seine under pouring rain and extreme security measures. What once prompted a security-oriented press response and legal attention went in a completely different direction as the Ceremony concluded. The legal scene around the event has since unfolded in rather unexpected ways.
As a spectator, the controversial “Last Supper” performance may have gone missed. The TVs were distant and the shows were spread out across the Seine. It did not go missed, however, by millions of viewers globally. The scene consisted of DJ Barbara Butch wearing a halo-like headdress in a skirt while seated at the centre of the table with drag artists atop a bridge. Meanwhile, the parade of athletes continued below. The organisers claimed the scene was not inspired by Christianity; instead, it was meant to be an “interpretation of the Greek God [of wine and festivity] Dionysus.”
Critics, however, viewed the scene as awfully similar to Jesus Da Vinci’s “The Last Supper” and the drag artists as the gathering of the 12 apostles the night before Jesus’s crucifixion in the painting. Critics include Elon Musk, Donald Trump, and even the Vatican. Later to respond, the Vatican said on August 3rd that it “deplored the offence” caused to Christians by the Olympic Games Opening Ceremony. French bishops alleged it to be a mockery of Christianity as Christians around the world took offence. C Spire, a U.S. mobile phone and internet company, even pulled Olympic ads due to the controversy.
On the opposite side, this storm of outrage has since taken a legal turn. Backlash against the performance has not remained completely civil. DJ Barbara Butch’s lawyer, Audrey Msellati, told Associated Press that she filed a formal legal complaint, “alleging online harassment, death threats, and insults.” The Paris Prosecutor’s Office acknowledged receipt of the complaint and tasked a hate crime police unit to investigate. The probe will focus on sexual orientation and religious-based hate. Olympic organisers have said that there was, “never an intention to show disrespect to any religious group” and that the goal was to, “celebrate community tolerance.” The division over the matter is thus an ongoing legal issue.
Anti-Doping International Law
Beyond the rarity of the Opening Ceremony, the expected anti-doping legal aspects of the Olympic Games have persisted. This Olympics, tensions have especially been felt around Chinese swimmers due to the doping concerns in Beijing 2022. Viewers may be left wondering, what laws and organisations govern doping in sports?
Firstly, According to the procedural rules of the CAS Anti-Doping Division of the Court of Arbitration for Sport:
“The Anti-Doping Division of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS ADD) has been established to hear and decide anti-doping cases as a first-instance authority pursuant to a delegation of powers from the International Olympic Committee (IOC), International Federations of sports on the Olympic programme (Olympic IFs), and any other signatories to the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC).”
Therefore, anti-doping matters for the Olympics are handled within the court but are also overseen by WADA, and recently the United States has more influence as well with the Rodchenkov Act. This Act gave the U.S. Government authority to investigate “doping conspiracies'' in sports events with U.S. athletes. This places the Olympics and most international sporting events under its umbrella.
In early July, U.S. authorities “issued a subpoena to an international swimming official who could have information about the case involving Chinese swimmers” who were allowed to compete even with positive results. As of late July, WADA has not pursued the case.
During Paris 2024, the more medals for China, the more scrutiny. Before the Games began, NBC reported that “among the 31-member swim roster it released Tuesday, the Chinese Swimming Association named almost a dozen swimmers who tested positive for the banned heart drug trimetazidine in 2021.” To alleviate concerns, strict and regular testing has been enforced. Furthermore, a strong legal force binds athletes to good conduct during the Olympics.
Evidently, Paris 2024’s legal scene has been diverse. From a combination of AI software laws to enable extreme security measures and the usual anti-doping concerns with athletes to an unexpected twist as DJ Barbara Butch takes legal measures against threats from the controversial act, it has certainly been multifaceted. As a spectator, safety felt especially significant and France’s security was certainly a felt presence. Overall, the opening ceremony was a great success. The new AI software showcases the adaptability of the EU legal framework to accommodate security demands. This will be an interesting development in upcoming years as other sports events in Europe potentially follow in France’s footsteps. To what extent will the EU adapt and compromise on its AI laws for future security requests?
In conclusion, behind every Olympic event, doping accusation and controversy, there is a complex legal scene that constantly evolves in new directions as exemplified by Paris 2024.
Photo by Katherine Clyne, 2024