About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


23 ESLJ 1 (2025)

handle is hein.journals/entersport23 and id is 1 raw text is: ENTERTAAINMENT AND Vashisht, V. 2025. Athlete Responsibility vs. Procedural Fairness: A Legal SPOR1T LAW JOURNAL Examination of Vinesh Phogat's Disqualification. Enterta/nment and Sports Law Journa/, 23(1): 1, pp. 1-5. DOI: https://doi.org/1 0.16997/eslj.1775 ARTICLE Athlete Responsibility vs. Procedural Fairness: A Legal Examination of Vinesh Phogat's Disqualification Veda Vashisht Law, Symbiosis Law School, Noida, IN vashishtveda@gmaiI.com The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) case involving Vinesh Phogat, a prominent Indian wrestler at the 2024 Paris Olympics, serves as a significant precedent in sports law emphasizing the importance of strict adherence to competition rules. Phogat was disqualified from the Women's Freestyle 50 kg final after fail- ing the second weigh-in by a margin of 100 grams. Despite her appeal, the CAS upheld her disqualification citing the clarity of United World Wrestling (UWW) rules and the necessity of maintaining consistency and fairness in competition. The dispute revolved around Article 11 of the UWW Rules which prohibits any weight tolerance for the second weigh-in. Phogat argued that her marginal weight excess was influenced by physiological factors including pre-menstrual water retention and asserted that such biological realities should be considered in applying the rules. However, the Sole Arbitrator concluded that these factors while natural cannot excuse non-compliance with weight requirements as they fall within the professional responsibilities of experienced athletes. The CAS decision reiterates the principle that athletes are responsible for complying with competition rules regardless of mitigating circumstances. Article 7 of the UWW Rules was pivotal in this regard as it states that athletes voluntarily participate in their chosen weight category and bear full responsibility for meeting the associated requirements. As an experienced wrestler Phogat was found to have under- stood the rules and made efforts to comply yet ultimately failed to meet the criteria. While the CAS ruling underscores the importance of strict liability and consistency in sports regulations it also raises questions about the balance between fairness and rigid rule enforcement. Moreover, the case highlights the challenges faced by athletes in competitions where natural biological processes like menstruation intersect with stringent weight requirements. Keywords: Paris Olympics; Sports law; Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS); United World Wrestling (UWW); United World Wrestling (UWW); Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS); Sports law Introduction The world of international sports is a complex web of rules, regulations, and adjudicatory bodies. All these aim to ensure fair play and integrity in competition. However, this can result in a dramatic and controversial outcome when these regulations collide with the high stakes of the Olympic Games. A recent example of this is the disqualification of Indian wrestler Vinesh Phogat from the 2024 Paris Summer Olympics finals. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)'s decision in the case of Vinesh Phogat v. United World Wrestling & International Olympic Committee' has sparked debate within the realms of international sports law. The Olympic Games are more than just a sporting event. They are a global spectacle in which athletes from across the world compete at the highest level. The stakes are immense not only in terms of national pride but also for the athletes personally. They strive to achieve what is often the pinnacle of their sporting careers. The rules governing these games are intended to be uniformly applied to all athletes in order to ensure a level playing field. However, the rigidity of these rules can sometimes lead to contentious outcomes. This is especially true when an athlete's eligibility to compete is at stake. In the case of Vinesh Phogat, the dispute stemmed from her disqualification due to a minor infraction of the weight limit for her category. Phogat, who was on the brink of securing a medal, was disqualified for exceeding the weight limit in her 50 kg weight category by 100 grams during the weigh-in before the finals. The CAS ruling maintained the disqualification. While the infarction might seem negligible, that is, just 100 grams over the 50 kg limit, the consequences were severe as this led to her exclusion from the final match and the loss of a potential Olympic medal. This decision has significant implications as to how sports law is interpreted especially regarding the severe enforcement of competition regulations and athlete rights.