Anti-arbitration: Olympic justice
August 2, 2012
LONDON OLYMPICS, August 1, 2012 — Badminton officials took the extraordinary step today of tossing out four teams for deliberately trying to lose their preliminary matches. The eight disciplined players were found to have conducted themselves “in a manner that is clearly abusive or detrimental to the sport.”
Imagine immediate (and less severe) consequences for behavior that is abusive and detrimental to the conduct of arbitral proceedings. Would this generate only protests, or also respect for institutions and arbitrators who show they have an Olympic backbone?
Tags:
Discipline
Comments (3)
Your email address will not be published.
You may also like

June 30, 2025
Geoffrey M Beresford Hartwell
With great respect (really, I'm an engineer, believe it!) Michael seems to be looking at arbitrators as authorities, akin to Judges, to be respected for their office. The fact is that they have no robes beyond the clothes they stand up (or sit down) in. Parties have to be managed with tact and, if that isn't possible, arbitrators have the choice of withdrawal (not a good option) or proceeding to a decision as best they can. Aggrandizement of arbitrators is, in the writers opinion, one of the worst aspects of the rise of the "super-arbitrator" the "haut arbitre" of modern times. Arbitration was conceived by traders as a mundane justice among peers. It's becoming, I suggest, a kind of erudite super-jurisprudence above the mortal plane. Read a typical ICC or LCIA award to see what I mean. I'll say nothing about the cost! Respect has to be earned, Michael. not compelled.