Samaranch supported the strengthening of Olympic neutrality: the IOC changes the Charter and opens a new phase of debate on the future of the Games
International Olympic Committee Vice-President Juan Antonio Samaranch supported changes to the Olympic Charter through which the IOC wants to protect the political neutrality of the Olympic movement more strongly. The changes were adopted on 24 June 2026 at the 146th IOC Session in Lausanne, held as part of the “Fit for the Future” process, through which the organisation’s new leadership wants to adapt the governance of the Olympic Games to an increasingly complex international environment. According to the IOC announcement, the aim of the amendments is to preserve the autonomy of sport, protect athletes and competitions from external pressures, and prevent the use of the Olympic Games for political, social or economic purposes. Samaranch, according to a Reuters report published by Channel NewsAsia, said that the IOC’s independence is “harder to preserve every day” because sport is increasingly under pressure from governments, public debates and global crises. In this way, one procedural change to the Charter also became a politically sensitive signal about how the IOC intends to make decisions in a period of intensified geopolitical tensions.
Neutrality as the central message of the new Charter
According to the IOC’s official statement, the key part of the reform concerns an addition to the rules that define the mission and role of the International Olympic Committee. A provision is being added to Rule 2 according to which the role of the IOC is to “apply neutrality at all times”, without governmental, cultural, social or economic pressure. The organisation states that this strengthens the existing fundamental principle of Olympism according to which sport should remain a space of peaceful competition, universality and equal access, and not an instrument of state, ideological or commercial interests. In the same document, the IOC explains that the changes also concern the Fundamental Principles of Olympism, in order to emphasise more clearly the political neutrality of the entire Olympic movement. Such wording is not only symbolic: it gives the IOC a more direct normative framework for future decisions in situations in which sporting appearances, flags, anthems, hosting rights or international sanctions overlap with politics.
Samaranch said on the margins of the Session in Lausanne, according to Reuters, that it is “more necessary than ever” for the Charter to give the IOC the possibility of preserving its independence. His message reflects the broader dilemma of the Olympic movement: the IOC wants at the same time to remain a universal sports organisation open to athletes from all over the world, but it must respond to wars, violations of international rules, government pressure, human rights issues and the safety of competitors. In that space, the concept of neutrality is often interpreted differently. For the IOC, it means protecting sport from direct political management, while critics warn that invoking neutrality can soften the consequences for states and institutions that are subject to international sanctions. That is precisely why the Charter amendments immediately raised the question of whether the new wording will in the future affect decisions on the status of Russian athletes and Russian sports bodies.
The Russian context remains the most sensitive part of the debate
The debate on neutrality cannot be separated from Russia’s position in international sport. In October 2023, the IOC suspended the Russian Olympic Committee after that body decided to include regional sports organisations from the territories of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia, which the IOC recognises as territories under the jurisdiction of the National Olympic Committee of Ukraine. According to the IOC statement at the time, such a move was assessed as a violation of the Olympic Charter because it undermines the territorial integrity of the Ukrainian Olympic Committee. The suspension meant that the Russian Olympic Committee cannot act as a national Olympic committee within the meaning of the Charter and cannot receive financial resources from the Olympic movement. At the same time, the IOC retained the right to decide separately on the possible participation of individual neutral athletes with Russian passports in Olympic competitions.
Reuters, in a report on the new Charter amendments, stated that critics believe the emphasis on political neutrality could make it easier for Russia to return to international sport in the future. The IOC, however, in its official announcements does not present the reform as a decision on Russia, but as a broader institutional framework for protecting the autonomy of sport and the Olympic Games themselves. That difference is important for understanding the current situation: the Charter change does not mean the automatic lifting of the suspension of the Russian Olympic Committee, nor does it by itself change the conditions for athletes’ participation. It can, however, become a legal and political basis to which the IOC will refer in future decisions on where legitimate sporting autonomy ends and where pressure begins that could undermine equality of competition. Therefore, the real effect of the amendments will be seen only when the new rules are applied to specific cases.
Reform of the Games programme: disciplines ahead of entire sports
Alongside neutrality, the 146th IOC Session also brought an important change in the way the Olympic programme is determined. According to the IOC’s official announcement, Rule 45 of the Olympic Charter now describes the Olympic Games programme through three components: the sports programme, the disciplines programme and the events programme. This means that decisions will no longer be viewed only through the question of whether a sport as a whole will be part of the Games, but also through individual disciplines and events that carry costs, venue requirements, logistics, athlete numbers and audience interest. The IOC states that the new approach will be applied for the first time to the Olympic Games in Brisbane 2032, with the possibility of flexibility because planning for that edition is already at an advanced stage. For the French Alps 2030, according to the same announcement, the new methodology will not be applied.
Samaranch, according to Reuters, assessed that evaluation by disciplines is fairer because it gives smaller sports a real chance to compete with larger ones. In practice, this means that an individual discipline within a larger sporting system can be assessed according to its own needs and impact, and not exclusively according to the reputation of the entire sport. The IOC explains that disciplines will first be checked against the criteria of governance, integrity, anti-doping compliance and athlete protection. After that comes evaluation according to global appeal, costs and operational complexity, as well as athlete representation. In the final phase, successful candidates for inclusion in the programme will be compared with disciplines that are already in the programme but, according to the data, show weaker results.
Brisbane 2032 as the first major test of the new model
Brisbane 2032 will be the first summer edition of the Games at which it will be clearly seen how the new model of the Olympic programme works. According to the IOC, the core programme of sports and disciplines should in the future generally be confirmed seven years before the Games, or at the Session at which the host is elected, if that is later. The final events programme and athlete quotas should be determined after the previous edition of the Games, by decision of the IOC Executive Board. Organising committees will be given the possibility of proposing up to four additional disciplines for the Summer Games and two for the Winter Games, with proposals having to remain under the control of the scope and sustainability of the entire event. This part of the reform is important because it leaves hosts room for local context and existing infrastructure, while at the same time limiting them so that the Olympic programme does not grow uncontrollably.
The change is especially important after years in which the Olympic Games have become ever larger, more expensive and more logistically complex. In its methodology, the IOC emphasises costs, operational feasibility and the need to maintain the global appeal of the programme. Such an approach can bring more transparency, but also more uncertainty for international federations that until now counted on a more stable position in the Olympic system. In the future, individual disciplines will have to prove not only tradition and sporting importance, but also the ability to fit into a sustainable, audience-relevant and organisationally feasible programme. For athletes and federations, this means that Olympic status will no longer be a permanent assumption, but a subject of regular evaluation.
Removal of the list of international federations from the Charter
One of the less visible but institutionally important changes is the removal of the list of international federations from the Olympic Charter. The IOC states that this list could create the impression of permanence of sports in the programme, although the actual Olympic programme is determined through separate decisions and criteria. By removing the list, the organisation wants to increase flexibility and more clearly separate recognition of an international federation from an automatic place in the Games programme. Such a change reduces the symbolic security of federations that were listed in the Charter, but gives the IOC greater ability to adapt the programme to future circumstances. According to the official explanation, the aim is to align the Charter with existing operational practice and enable programme decisions to be based on objective and transparent criteria.
This shift fits into the IOC’s broader attempt to preserve tradition and at the same time adapt the Games to new sporting habits, media formats and financial constraints. Modernising the programme is a sensitive issue because every change can affect athletes’ careers, national investments in sport, television rights and the position of international federations. If decisions in the future are made on the basis of data on global reach, costs and organisational feasibility, some sports and disciplines could get a new opportunity, while others would have to reduce their scope or prove additional value for the Olympic programme. The IOC therefore presents the reform as a mechanism for the long-term sustainability of the Games, not as a short-term review of the popularity of individual sports. In practice, however, every decision to exclude or include disciplines is likely to provoke strong reactions from sporting communities.
Coventry and “Fit for the Future” as the framework of the new leadership
The Session in Lausanne was held in the first period of the mandate of IOC President Kirsty Coventry, who was elected in 2025 as the organisation’s tenth president and the first woman in that position. According to official IOC data, Coventry was elected at the 144th Session in Greece, and she took office after the handover in June 2025. The “Fit for the Future” reform is therefore also seen as the first more important test of her leadership in an attempt to make the Olympic system more flexible, more financially sustainable and more resistant to external pressures. In its official announcement on the Charter changes, the IOC states that the recommendations arose from two working groups: one dealt with the Fundamental Principles of Olympism and neutrality, and the other with the Olympic programme. This gave the reform a broader institutional form, instead of reducing it to one decision on an individual political case or one edition of the Games.
According to the IOC, the working group on the Fundamental Principles of Olympism considered how to protect the IOC, the Olympic Games and sport from inappropriate governmental, political, social and economic pressures. The second group, focused on the Olympic programme, proposed a move to an approach in which disciplines have a more important role than formal categories of sports. In both cases, the common idea is that more decisions should be made at the level at which the consequences are most visible: in neutrality, these are athletes and competitions, and in the programme, these are specific venues, quotas, costs and audience interest. Such an approach can give the IOC greater management precision, but also greater responsibility because every decision will have to be explained by clear criteria. In a world in which sporting competitions increasingly overlap with wars, sanctions, identity debates and economic pressures, the credibility of those criteria will be decisive.
What the changes mean for athletes and the Olympic movement
For athletes, the most important message of the IOC is that the reform is presented as protection of their right to safe, fair and politically non-instrumentalised competition. According to the official announcement, the Charter amendments should help preserve the integrity, universality and peaceful mission of the Olympic Games. At the same time, however, the question opens as to how the balance between universality and responsibility will be implemented in practice. If the IOC insists on neutrality as protection from external pressures, it will have to clearly show that neutrality does not mean ignoring violations of rules, security risks or decisions that directly encroach on the territorial integrity of national Olympic committees. The case of the Russian Olympic Committee has shown precisely how sensitive such decisions can be and how quickly sporting rules can find themselves at the centre of international politics.
For the Olympic programme, the consequences will be more concrete and measurable. Federations, organisers and athletes will have to adapt to a system in which disciplines are assessed according to a broader set of criteria, from integrity and anti-doping to the cost of venues and global appeal. In this way, the IOC is trying to keep the Games as the most important multi-sport event, but without constant expansion that burdens hosts and infrastructure. The advantage of such a model can be greater openness to new disciplines, especially those that have a strong young audience or can fit into existing facilities. The risk, however, is that traditional disciplines will face greater uncertainty, especially if they are expensive, logistically demanding or have smaller global reach.
Neutrality as a promise and a test of credibility
Samaranch’s support for the Charter amendments therefore cannot be viewed only as formal agreement with the new text of the document. It is part of a broader message that the IOC wants to make decisions independently in a period in which universality, moral clarity, protection of athletes and financial sustainability of the Games are being demanded of it at the same time. According to Reuters, Samaranch emphasised that the IOC must “arm itself” with the Charter in order to be able to make the right decisions, which shows that the top of the Olympic movement sees the reform as a defensive mechanism. According to the IOC, the amendments are conceived as a way to protect Olympic autonomy and prevent the misuse of sport for political purposes. Whether this framework will truly increase trust in the Olympic system will depend on how consistently, transparently and equally the IOC applies the new rules to all future cases.
Sources:
- International Olympic Committee – official statement on the changes to the Olympic Charter adopted at the 146th Session in Lausanne (link)
- International Olympic Committee – explanation of the new Olympic programme methodology and evaluation by disciplines from Brisbane 2032 (link)
- International Olympic Committee – official page of the 146th IOC Session in Lausanne, 24 and 25 June 2026 (link)
- International Olympic Committee – Olympic Charter in force from 24 June 2026 and description of its role in the Olympic movement (link)
- Channel NewsAsia / Reuters – report from Lausanne with statements by Juan Antonio Samaranch on neutrality and the independence of the IOC (link)
- Channel NewsAsia / Reuters – report on the adoption of the Charter amendments, political neutrality and the change to the Olympic programme (link)
- International Olympic Committee – decision of the IOC Executive Board on the suspension of the Russian Olympic Committee from October 2023 (link)