The International Sports Law Journal

, Volume 15, Issue 1–2, pp 101–111 | Cite as

Foucault, justice, and athletes with prosthetics: the 2008 CAS Arbitration Report on Oscar Pistorius

Article
First Online:

Abstract

The participation of Oscar Pistorius in the 2012 London Olympic Games served as a significant milestone for the inclusion of disabled athletes in major international athletics. An account of the struggle by Pistorius to compete in international competition is presented by the 2008 CAS Arbitration Report released by the CAS arbitration panel that ultimately ruled for his eligibility. Superficially, the Arbitration Report reads as an account of a correction in procedural error, with the CAS Arbitration Panel working to correct the decision of an IAAF hearing that the CAS Arbitration Panel critiqued as lacking transparency and going “off the rails.” This paper, however, goes beyond a superficial reading of the Arbitration Report and instead engages a deeper analysis by applying the theories of Michel Foucault to identify what the report reveals about the nature of justice under the CAS for athletes with prosthetics in international sport.

Keywords

Postmodernism Foucault Disabled athlete Sport Justice Arbitration 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Conflict of interest

The author received no financial interest or benefit arising from this research.

References

  1. Best S, Kellner D (1991) Postmodern theory. Guilford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Blachowicz J (2009) How science textbooks treat scientific method: a philosopher’s perspective. Br J Philos Sci 60(2):303–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blackshaw I (2006) Fair play on and off the field of play: settling sports disputes through the court of arbitration for sport. Int Sports Law J 2006:107Google Scholar
  4. Bruggemann G-P et al (2008) Biomechanics of a double transtibial amputee using dedicated sprinting prosthetics. Sports Technol 1(4–5):220–227Google Scholar
  5. Chapman GE (1997) Making weight: lightweight rowing, technologies of power, and technologies of the self. J Sport Soc Issues 17(2):77–97Google Scholar
  6. Chappell A (2008) Running down a dream: pistorius, prosthetic devices, and the unknown future of athletes with disabilities in the olympic games. North Carolina J Law Technol 10(1):16–27Google Scholar
  7. Charlish P, Riley S (2007) Should oscar run? Fordham Intell Prop Media Entertain Law J 18:929Google Scholar
  8. Cole CL, Giardina M, Andrews D (2004) Michel Foucault: studies of power in sport. In: Giulianotti R (ed) Sport and modern social theorists. Palgrave Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) (2008) Arbitration CAS 2008/A/1480 Pistorius v/IAAF, award of 16 May 2008. http://jurisprudence.tas-cas.org/sites/CaseLaw/Shared%20Documents/1480.pdf
  10. Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) (2013) Arbitration Code 2013. http://www.tas-cas.org/statutes
  11. Foucault M (1972) The archaeology of knowledge and discourse on language. Pantheon Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Foucault M (1978) The history of sexuality. Vintage Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Foucault M (1979) Discipline and Punish. Vintage Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Foucault M (1980) Two lectures. In: Gordon C (ed) Power/knowledge: selected interviews and other writings. Harvester, Harlow, pp 1972–1977Google Scholar
  15. Foucault M (1988) Technologies of the self. In: Martin L, Gutman H, Hutton P (eds) Technologies of the self. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Gimbel S (ed) (2011) Exploring the scientific method. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  17. International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) (2013) Rules & regulations. Accessed 10 Sept 10. http://www.iaaf.org/about-iaaf/documents/rules-regulations
  18. Johns D, Johns J (2000) Surveillance, subjectivism and technologies of power. Int Rev Sociol Sport 35(2):219–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Markula P (2003) The technologies of the self: sport, feminism, and Foucault. Soc Sport J 20:87–107Google Scholar
  20. Markula P (2004) “tuning into one’s self”: foucault’s technologies of the self and mindful fitness. Soc Sport J 21:302–321Google Scholar
  21. Markula P, Pringle R (2006) Foucault, sport and exercise: power, knowledge and transforming the self. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. McArdle D (2008) Just one of the challenges of 21st-century life”: Oscar Pistorius in the court of arbitration for sport. SCRIPTed 5(2):404–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mitten M, Opie H (2010) “Sports law”: implications for the development of international, comparative, and national law and global dispute resolution. Tulane Law Rev 85:269–322Google Scholar
  24. Molnar G, Kelly J (2013) Sport, exercise and social theory. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Nafziger J (1988) International sports law. Transnational Publishers, USAGoogle Scholar
  26. Norman M, Moola F (2011) “Bladerunner or boundary runner”?: Oscar Pistorius, Cyborg transgressions and strategies of containment. Sport Soc 14(9):1265–1279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Shogan D, Ford M (2000) A new sport ethics: taking Konig seriously. Int Rev Soc Sport 35:49–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Siekmann R, Soek J (1998) Basic documents of international sports organisations. Kluwer Law International, USAGoogle Scholar
  29. Smith Maguire J (2002) Michel Foucault: sport, power, technologies and governmentality. In: Maguire J, Young K (eds) Theory, sport and society. Elsevier, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. United Nations (2013) Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Accessed 10 Sept 2013. http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?mtdsg_no=IV-15&chapter=4&lang=en
  31. Wild S (2012) On equal footing: does accommodating athletes with disabilities destroy the competitive playing field or level it? Pepperdine Law Rev 37(4):1347–1392Google Scholar
  32. Zettler P (2009) Is it cheating to use cheetahs? The implications of technologically innovative prosthetics for sports values and rules. Boston Univ Int Law J 27:367–409Google Scholar

Copyright information

© T.M.C. Asser Instituut 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.EBL W38 Law SchoolUniversity of New EnglandArmidaleAustralia

Personalised recommendations