Few sporting events generate as much public attention for their sponsors as the Olympics.
Nowadays, however, not all of that attention is positive. The twelve most prominent sponsors, including General Electric, Coca-Cola and McDonalds Corporation, stand accused of being complicit in human rights abuses in China by (correctly) ignoring calls to speak publicly about such abuses in the lead up to the games.
In April, Human Rights Watch (HRW) noted that it has witnessed an increase in human rights abuses in the lead-up to the games. These included violations of media freedom as well as intensifying persecution of Chinese human rights defenders, in addition to the ongoing crackdown in Tibet.
In response, HRW called for Olympic sponsors to take undertake six specific action steps, which are broadly aimed at pressing the Chinese government to address key human rights issues.
Corporate sponsors should act on the second step, which calls on them to certify that their own operations in China do not entail human rights abuses. All twelve major sponsors have made public commitments in support of human rights. They should uphold these commitments and conduct their own business affairs accordingly.
But that is as far as they should go.
To be sure, the Chinese government deserves criticism, and United Nations, foreign governments and human rights organizations should apply pressure upon China to improve its human rights record.
But there are three key reasons why corporate sponsors should refrain from involvement in this activity.
• Corporate sponsors are business entities, not governments or the UN.
They are not elected representatives of the international community and as such, they have no mandate to involve themselves in political issues.
Accordingly, corporate sponsors should refrain from any political engagement unless the issue concerned has a direct impact upon their business operations.
• The Olympics is a sporting event, not a political event.
It is a global celebration of the skill, ability, dedication and commitment of world class athletes.
The role of Olympic sponsorship is to support athletes. It does not entail engagement in political activity of the host country.
• Action speaks louder than words.
The most powerful way in which Olympic sponsors can make a statement is to ensure that the fundamental principles of human rights are upheld within their own operations.
Positive action on the ground says a great deal more about commitment to human rights than mere public criticism of governments.
In summary, Olympic sponsors have a responsibility both to provide full support to athletes and to ensure that their own operations are free from human rights abuses.
But public criticism of sovereign governments is the preserve of others, including the UN, foreign governments and other international agencies.
Recent Comments