AboutContact UsRegister
Clearinghouse for Sport
The information and knowledge sharing platform for Australian sport

Human rights

Ethical events comply fully with human rights principles and practices as proposed by the United Nations (UN) in the 2011 Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

Ethical events comply fully with human rights principles and practices of the United Nations (UN) Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights published in 2011. These principles outline state responsibilities to protect human rights, corporate responsibilities to respect human rights and access to remedy for those whose rights have been infringed. In the major sporting event context, host governments and awarding bodies are expected to comply with these guiding principles. 16

Events can have both positive and negative impacts on different human rights issues. On the positive side, events can help develop social infrastructure, create jobs, lead to urban renewal, and provide powerful demonstration of good and promising practice. On the negative side, force evictions or removal of homeless people or people from areas where construction will take place, 17 death or exploitation of workers or volunteers, supply chain issues such as using ‘sweat shops’ or child labour for manufacturing of merchandise or apparel have all impacted events in the past. 18

Major sporting events are increasingly recognising the responsibility to protect human rights. The Glasgow 2014 Commonwealth Games organising committee was the first major sporting event to publish a human rights position statement, 19 followed by its post-Games report. 20 From 2024 the Olympic and Paralympic Games host contracts also include human rights clauses. 21 Other examples of human rights policies and guidelines include:

  • IOC Strategic Framework on Human Rights, opens in a new tab, International Olympic Committee, (September 2022). All constituents of the Olympic Movement need to respect internationally recognised human rights within their respective remit. The IOC Human Rights Strategic Framework will reinforce key programmes and initiatives by mainstreaming a human rights approach into current work and programmes, in close cooperation with the teams in charge of complementary topics such as gender equality, safeguarding, sustainability and key functions and departments within the IOC.
  • Human Rights Policy Statement, opens in a new tab, Commonwealth Games Federation, (June 2022). Through this Human Rights Policy Statement, we aim to mobilise and leverage the potential of the entire Commonwealth Sport Movement to protect, respect, remedy and promote the human rights of athletes, citizens and communities across the Commonwealth who are involved with or impacted by our events, actions, programmes, and activities.
  • Approach to Human Rights and Post-Games report, opens in a new tab, Gold Coast 2018 XXI Commonwealth Games, (August 2018). GOLDOC demonstrated its commitment to human rights, transparency, and accountability through the publication of its Human Rights Policy (Policy). This Policy guided and directed actions and decisions taken by GOLDOC in relation to matters associated with human rights in the planning and delivery of GC2018. Focus areas included: supply chain impacts; athlete wellbeing; local community impacts; security; work health and safety.
  • The Mega-Sporting Event Lifecycle: Embedding Human Rights from Vision to Legacy, opens in a new tab, Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights, (April 2018). This guide presents the lifecycle of a mega-sporting event, with specific elements of good practice at each stage that those involved in hosting the event should integrate into their planning, delivery, and legacy to ensure a rights-compliant event.

Resources and reading

  • GC2018 Legacy: Beyond the Games report 2024, opens in a new tab, Ernst and Young (EY), (2024). In June 2023, the Department of Tourism and Sport (DTS) engaged the services of EY to prepare the final Post Games Legacy Report (this Report) to assess the benefits against key objectives listed in the associated Monitoring and Evaluation Framework. This evaluation framework was collaboratively developed by the Queensland State Government and City of Gold Coast and other partners. This Report also provides an analysis of lessons learnt and potential considerations for Brisbane 2032 Olympics and Paralympics Games legacy planning. Highlights relating to human rights include:
    • From a human rights perspective, there were several initiatives targeted at supporting human rights in the lead up to and during GC2018, with examples including measuring the inclusion of LGBTI+ people in Australian sport, having equal event and medal chances for both men and women and the inclusion of the RAP. GOLDOC won the inaugural Government Award from the Australian Human Rights Commission for its human rights policy, which has been used to inform the human rights approach of other events (e.g. 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup).
  • FIFA 2023 Women’s World Cup Human Rights Risk Assessment, opens in a new tab, Australian Human Rights Commission, (December 2021). In July 2021, in line with its stated commitment to human rights, the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) partnered with the national human rights institutions of the two host countries: the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) and the New Zealand Human Rights Commission (NZHRC) to consider human rights concerns related to the FWWC2023. This Human Rights Risk Assessment has identified the salient human rights risks, which the AHRC and NZHRC recommend that FIFA should take into consideration in preparation for the FWWC2023. Recommendations in relation to these risks are set out in section 4 of this report. Salient risks categories identified included:
    • Risks for workers (including in supply chains)
    • Risks of labour exploitation for volunteers
    • Risks pertaining to sponsors and broadcasters
    • Risks for players, coaches and support crew
    • Risks for spectators and the broader community
    • Australia’s First Nations peoples and Aotearoa New Zealand’s tangata whenua (the Indigenous people of Aotearoa New Zealand)
    • Accessibility risks
    • Risks for children and young adults
    • Safeguarding, grievance mechanisms, risks to the right to remedy
    • Other human rights issues to be considered
  • Changing the game: A critical analysis of accountability in Mega Sport Event infrastructure delivery, opens in a new tab, Engineers Against Poverty, (20 May 2021). This paper explores the meaning of accountability as an overarching value to improve the governance of MSEs and the delivery of related infrastructure. We highlight the challenges of establishing accountability mechanisms, explore the consequences that a lack of accountability can generate in addition to corruption and labour exploitation, and discuss how channels of civic engagement can help close the accountability gap. We also present recommendations that we believe are key to overcoming these challenges. including spaces for multi-stakeholder dialogue and the application of access to information laws.
  • Risks to Children in relation to Mega-Sports Events, opens in a new tab, Centre for Sport and Human Rights, (September 2020). Based on the Sporting Chance White Paper 4.1 “Children’s Rights in the Sport Context” (2017), a literature review and consultations with more than 30 Partners and Stakeholders, the following were identified as risks specific to children in relation to mega sporting events.
  • Recommendations for an IOC Human Rights Strategy, opens in a new tab, Independent Expert Report by Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein and Rachel Davi to the International Olympic Committee, (March 2020). To build on its work to date, respond to existing human rights challenges, get ahead of emerging ones, and take account of changing stakeholder expectations, the IOC needs to clarify how it understands its responsibility for human rights. Doing so will help bring coherence to its human rights efforts, and enable it to lead the Olympic Movement’s engagement with a range of salient human rights issues for sports. We believe that the UN Guiding Principles are the logical reference point for clarifying the IOC’s responsibility and developing a strategy to put this into action. In this section we explore the key contours of this shift in understanding of responsibility and what it would mean for the IOC in practice.
  • All-Party Parliamentary Group on Sport Modern Slavery and Human Rights: Interim Report, opens in a new tab, Institute for Human Rights and Business, (July 2019). The APPG has also taken a particular interest in MSEs, hearing from those companies, trade unions and NGOs involved in events such as the 2018 FIFA World Cup in Russia, Tokyo 2020 and Qatar 2022. The conditions facing migrant workers in construction are a particular concern and the APPG has seen the value of human rights due diligence under frameworks such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The APPG also heard from journalists who cover some of these events as well as a number of media companies about their responsibilities as broadcasters. This report shares some initial findings from the APPG for the UK Government and legislators. These findings are based on the evidence received in the first half of the APPG and are therefore subject to change and review.
  • Approach to Human Rights and Post-Games report, opens in a new tab, Gold Coast 2018 XXI Commonwealth Games, (August 2018). GOLDOC demonstrated its commitment to human rights, transparency and accountability through the publication of its Human Rights Policy6 (Policy). This Policy guided and directed actions and decisions taken by GOLDOC in relation to matters associated with human rights in the planning and delivery of GC2018. The Policy adopted the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) as an appropriate reference standard to provide guidance to embed a human rights-based approach within the organisation. Focus areas included: supply chain impacts; athlete wellbeing; local community impacts; security; work health and safety.
  • Post-Games Sustainability Report, opens in a new tab, Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games Corporation, (August 2018). GC2018 was a transformational event for the Gold Coast, our event cities and communities throughout Queensland. It created new opportunities, built capacity and shaped an enduring legacy that will last beyond the Closing Ceremony. Some key impact and legacy outcomes relating to inclusion and human rights:
    • World-first commitment to delivery legacy outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; first-time gender equality in medal events for men and women; Participation in Australia's first bench-marking program designed to measure inclusion of LGBTI people in sport; accessible venues for people with accessibility requirements; largest para-sport program in Commonwealth Games history - 38 medal events and 300 para-athletes; human rights policy, demonstrating commitment to the UN Guiding Principles.
  • Approach to human rights: post games update, opens in a new tab, Glasgow 2014 XX Commonwealth Games, (2014). In December 2013, coinciding with International Human Rights Day and the launch of SNAP, Scotland’s National Action Plan for Human Rights, the Organising Committee (OC) published its own ‘Approach to Human Rights’. The Institute for Human Rights and Business (IHRB) subsequently advised that this “became the first [mega sporting event] organiser to publish a human rights position statement.” The Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) values of Humanity, Equality and Destiny provided us with the framework we needed to outline our plans in the Approach and we have retained this framework for the purposes of this paper. What follows is a progress report on the major programmes and activities outlined in section 3 of the Approach, as well as a reflection on lessons learned.

  • Human rights and the olympics: from an ideological paradox to a new anti-corruption legacy, opens in a new tab, Dikaia Chatziefstathiou, Simon Rofe, Frontiers in Sports and Acitve Living, Volume 6, (September 2024). This article aims to explore the evolution of the debates surrounding human rights in the discourse(s) of major sporting events (MSEs), particularly the Olympics. The paper will first analyse the western-centric origins of the “universality” of the Olympic philosophy and how it affected the protection and promotion of human rights, as well as addressing practical challenges or limitations faced. It will then focus on unpacking the elements of sportswashing and soft power in the multi-discursive context of sport where power, privilege, politics, and position are (re)produced. In doing so it draws upon the emergent field of Sports Diplomacy as the most appropriate explanatory framework to share in this discourse. Finally, it will explore the potential impact of anti-corruption reforms on the establishment of a meaningful human rights legacy.
  • The role of advocacy organisations for ethical mega sport events, opens in a new tab, David McGillivray, Joerg Koenigstorfer, Jason Bocarro, et al., Sport Management Review, Volume 25(2), pp.234-253, (2022). Non-governmental organisations have sought to enshrine progressive and ethical principles, protocols, and practices into governance arrangements for mega sport events. Evidence on whether, and how, they influence awarding bodies and events for the better, however, is scarce. Two research questions guided the present research: What role human rights advocacy organisations play at different stages of the event lifecycle? What is the nature of relationships between advocacy organisations and event awarding bodies to ensure that human rights are effectively embedded into decision-making processes? The authors conducted interviews with representatives from three advocacy organisations campaigning for human rights, two event awarding bodies and two intermediary organisations. A thematic analysis revealed four central themes: accepting responsibility for human rights; considering events as human-rights leveraging opportunity; facilitating within-coalition balance and independence of advocacy organisations; and implementing good governance and structural change. The findings contribute to the understanding of advocacy organisations within the sport event context by identifying relevant roles and relationships (including success factors and burdens on human rights).
  • Embedding Child Rights Principles and Practises in Mega Sport Event Planning, opens in a new tab, Oluwaseyi Aina, David McGillivray, Sandro Carnicelli, et al., frontiers in Sports and Active Living, (September 2021). Recently, there has been growing concern about the lack of intentionality of mega sport event (MSE) organisers in ensuring that child rights are adequately respected, protected and promoted before, during, and after the events take place. In the context of the summer Olympic Games, reported child rights infringements have been on the rise, both in relation to abuse in sport itself and the negative consequences associated with planning and delivering the Games. In response to reports of child rights infringements, a coalition of actors, including non-governmental and civil society organisations have sought to pressure event owners and organisers to strengthen protections in the planning and delivery of their events. To date, however, child rights commitments have not been fully embedded in policies and principles guiding the planning and delivery of the Olympic Games. In this article, we explore the field of child rights in the context of the Olympic Games, focusing on a case study of the Tokyo 2020 edition. Findings show that while the Japanese authorities have signed up to international child rights conventions and embedded some child participation strategies in Games-related activity, there was little evidence that Tokyo 2020 organisers had developed or implemented robust policies, principles or practises to respect, protect and promote child rights in Games planning. This absence, we argue, is because there was no requirement to embed child rights commitments during the bidding or planning phases, as the IOC had yet to enshrine human rights in its host city contract when the Games were first awarded to Tokyo. We argue that it is imperative the IOC embeds child rights principles and protocols in the bidding and planning processes to ensure that the risks to children are foregrounded and acted upon by host cities and their partners, elevating human rights to a position equal to other Games requirements. This study is of international significance as the evidence will aid future host city bidders to ensure children's rights are embedded in MSE policies for each nation.
  • A conceptual model and research agenda for bidding, planning and delivering Major sport events that lever human rights, opens in a new tab, David McGillivray, Michael Edwards, Ian Brittain, et al., Leisure Studies, Volume 38(2), pp.175-190, (2019). In this conceptual article, the authors propose a framework for how progressive human rights outcomes may be obtained in the context of bidding, planning and implementing major sport events (MSEs) through the implementation of four pathways, including good governance, the democratic participation of stakeholders, the formalisation of human rights agendas and the deployment of sensitive urban development. The authors argue that there is a need for adherence to internationally recognised standards, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights if rhetorical statements from MSE awarding bodies and host organisers are to be accountable to a wider set of actors.
  • Breakthrough or much ado about nothing? FIFA’s new bidding process in the light of best practice examples of human rights assessments under UNGP Framework, opens in a new tab, Florian Kirschner, International Sports Law Journal, Volume 19, pp.133-153, (2019). The article will first identify the new requirements as result of the recent MSE and human rights discourse and embed FIFA’s approach in the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGP) Framework. The paper will then identify standards and best practice examples for HRIA under the UNGP Framework, which serve as benchmarks for the evaluation of the approach taken by FIFA and its implementation by the submitted Bid Books. While parts of the framework for the HRIA established by FIFA are quite progressive, other parts do not qualify for ‘playing in the premier league’. Areas of concern are the meaningful engagement of stakeholders, monitoring as well as aspects of transparency. Therefore, the paper suggests to mandate a multi-stakeholder entity to develop the human rights strategy, to conduct the HRIA and to monitor the human rights performance, as well as to implement of a fixed human rights evaluation matrix.
  • The right to adequate housing: evictions of the homeless and the elderly caused by the 2020 Summer Olympics in Tokyo, opens in a new tab, Naofumi Suzuki, Tetsuo Ogawa, Nanako Inaba, Leisure Studies, Volume 37(1), pp.59-96, (2018). The reconstruction of the National Stadium for the 2020 Summer Olympics and Paralympics in Tokyo has induced displacement of two groups of vulnerable people, raising concerns of the violation of human rights, particularly the right to adequate housing. The expansion of the stadium led to the expulsion of dozens of homeless people who lived in and around the park surrounding the stadium, and a sudden decision to demolish a nearby public housing estate built for the 1964 Summer Games forced over 200 tenants, most of whom were elderly, to be relocated. While the homeless people engaged in several rounds of negotiation with the government authorities, the majority of the housing tenants reluctantly agreed to move except for a few who kept demanding respectful treatment from the metropolitan government. Presenting the preliminary results of a mixed-method three-year qualitative study, this research note demonstrates that while the authority might have offered alternative housing considered ‘adequate’ in terms of physical living conditions, the process of evictions did not afford autonomy for the affected to choose where to live. The respective status of the affected – homeless and elderly – may demand the reconsideration of the concept of ‘adequate housing’ in relation to human dignity.
  • Tapping the potential of human rights provisions in mega-sporting events’ bidding and hosting agreements, opens in a new tab, Daniela Heerdt, International Sports Law Journal, Volume 17, pp.170-185, (2018). This article explores the implications of unprecedented commitments by leading international sports organizations to include human rights principles into their bidding requirements and hosting agreements. In May 2017, UEFA communicated their updated requirements for the 2024 tournament, which now explicitly refer to human rights protection. Four months later, the 2024 and 2028 Summer Olympic Games have been awarded to Paris and Los Angeles, for which the IOC drafted host city contracts that for the first time in the history of Olympic Games include human rights clauses. In November 2017, FIFA announced the adoption of new bidding requirements for the 2026 tournament, which expressly mention the protection of human rights. The aim of this article is to examine if and how such provisions and requirements could improve access to remedy for victims of human rights violations that occurred in the course of delivering mega-sporting events. In pursuing this aim, this article sheds light on the scope and enforceability of these measures and looks into the extent to which the Court of Arbitration for Sport is equipped to deal with human rights matters.
  • Understanding the denial of abuses of human rights connected to sports mega-events*, opens in a new tab, John Horne, Leisure Studies, Volume 37(1), pp.11-21, (2018). Academics debate the positive and negative consequences of hosting sports mega-events, and although there is a general recognition that doing so cannot be a panacea for solving other social issues, who wins and who loses tends to be the same. This article considers why mega-events are not more regularly resisted given the routinization of harm to local populations that they tend to invoke. It develops ideas derived from the late sociologist and criminologist Stanley Cohen concerning the relationships between, and the politics of, denial and acknowledgement, with specific attention to the role of academics, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the media. The article illustrates the difficulties in exposing, contesting and transforming these human rights abuses, but suggests that there are grounds for optimism as new strategies for communicating human rights abuses in connection with sports mega-events are developed.
  • Mega-sporting events and children’s rights and interests – towards a better future, opens in a new tab, Suzanne Dowse, Sacha Powell, Mike Weed, Leisure Studies, Volume 37(1), pp.97-108, (2018). The public subsidy of Olympic Games and FIFA World Cup hosting opportunities is invariably justified on the basis that they will secure a range of public good outcomes. Problematically, the information available inspires less confidence that these ambitions will be met and highlights how social costs and benefits are unevenly distributed. As a result, interest in the social dimension of hosting has grown, yet the knowledge to support responsive and evidence-based events policy remains relatively underdeveloped, particularly in relation to the specific needs and experiences of affected communities. The impact on children as a particularly stakeholder group reflects this context of recognition and knowledge gap. For example, while it is accepted that immovable deadlines and risk of reputational consequences raise a variety of social justice concerns throughout the event lifecycle, the nature and scale of these impacts on children is poorly understood and frequently mismanaged. Findings drawn from research commissioned by Terre des Hommes International Federation which explored the intersections between children’s rights and social justice concerns highlights how such initiatives present risks and opportunities that cannot be managed effectively until children are included within associated planning processes as a specific stakeholder group with distinct needs and interests.
  • Human rights and the Beijing Olympics: imagined global community and the transnational public sphere, opens in a new tab, Susan Brownell, British Journal of Sociology, Volume 63(2), pp.306-327, (June 2012). The Olympic Games are increasingly used by non-governmental organizations to demand transnational forms of accountability from public authorities. This article assesses the effectiveness of transnational public opinion surrounding the Beijing 2008 Olympics, when the pressure of Western public opinion was exerted upon the government of the world's most populous non-Western nation to improve its human rights record. Utilizing the concepts of ‘imagined global community’ and ‘transnational public sphere’, it finds that the Olympic Games had helped to call into existence a transnational public that ran up against the obstacle posed by the incomplete formation of supra-national forms of governance. The International Olympic Committee, a non-governmental organization, was a weak substitute. Because of the strong desire of Chinese people to take part in transnational deliberations, the article concludes with optimism about the potential of transnational public spheres that include Chinese people to develop toward more effective forms of transnational governance. But the IOC must strengthen the voice of its non-Western members, and Western interlocutors, including the media, must accept their share of the responsibility for creating the conditions for egalitarian dialogue.
  • The Olympics as a platform for protest: a case study of the London 2012 ‘ethical’ Games and the Play Fair campaign for workers’ rights, opens in a new tab, Jill Timms, Leisure Studies, Volume 31(3), pp.355-372, (2012). The Olympic Games, with its distinctive ethos and reach, offers a valuable opportunity for those able to mobilise it as a platform for their own purposes. This paper focuses on how global social justice groups are pursuing this goal. It is argued that the types of protest utilising the Olympic platform change over time and reflect distinct historical phases of the Games. Contemporary anti-Olympic and Olympic watchdog campaigns are characterised by contestation over the prioritising of corporate interests, so contribute to wider critiques of globalising capitalism. The Play Fair campaign for the rights of workers making official Olympic merchandise and supplies exemplifies this, as it mobilises the Olympic platform to question and influence working practices within transnational supply chains. A case study of the campaign is presented, drawing on documentary analysis, interviews and participant observations undertaken since the launch of PlayFair 2012 in February 2010. It was found that by targeting London 2012 corporate discourses of ‘ethics’ and ‘sustainability’ in its campaign to ensure a ‘sweat free’ Olympics, Play Fair connects the production of major sporting events to wider issues of global inequality, poverty and structural problems in transnational labour markets.

  • IOC Strategic Framework on Human Rights, opens in a new tab, International Olympic Committee, (September 2022). In order to fulfil the goal of Olympism, all constituents of the Olympic Movement need to respect internationally recognised human rights within their respective remit. The IOC Human Rights Strategic Framework will reinforce key programmes and initiatives by mainstreaming a human rights approach into current work and programmes, in close cooperation with the teams in charge of complementary topics such as gender equality, safeguarding, sustainability and key functions and departments within the IOC.
  • Legacy and sustainable policy, opens in a new tab, Paris 2024, (June 2022). Paris 2024, in alignment with the IOC Agenda 2020 and in alignment with the UN Sustainable Development Goals, is committed to organize Olympic and Paralympic Games of a new era; Games that contribute to the ecological and social transformation of the society.
    • Organize Games that drive social and economic development for the host territories and improve their quality of life for as many people as possible; that support inclusion, egality, solidarity, the fight against racism and stereotypes; and that strengthens the role of sport in society.
    • Mobilize the Generation 2024 to accelerate society transformation through education and citizen engagement, by and through sport.
  • Human Rights Policy Statement, opens in a new tab, Commonwealth Games Federation, (June 2022). Through this Human Rights Policy Statement, we aim to mobilise and leverage the potential of the entire Commonwealth Sport Movement to protect, respect, remedy and promote the human rights of athletes, citizens and communities across the Commonwealth who are involved with or impacted by our events, actions, programmes and activities. All Commonwealth citizens are all equally entitled to human rights without discrimination, whatever their ethnic origin, colour, race, nationality, culture, religion or belief, political opinion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation or disability or any other improper ground. These rights are universal, and all connected, interdependent and indivisible from each other.
  • Safeguarding Policy, opens in a new tab, Commonwealth Games Federation, (June 2022). The CGF recognises the importance of Safeguarding and is committed to working towards the creation of a safe sport environment at all levels. After a wide stakeholder consultation, the CGF is pleased to share its first safeguarding policy. The CGF Safeguarding Policy aims to set a framework to protect all individuals connected with CGF, in particular children and adults at risk, including adult athletes, from any type of harm and/or abuse when they come into contact with CGF or are engaged in activities connected to CGF. The policy sets out safeguarding responsibilities for CGF Officials and others who engage with the CGF. It also ensures CGF Officials and others know how to respond appropriately when concerns are raised about children or adults at risk.
  • Athlete Advocacy Guiding Principles, opens in a new tab, Commonwealth Games Federation, (February 2022). This work has been developed by and for athletes, but it applies to all Participants who may wish to make positive expressions of their values in accordance with these Guiding Principles.
    • The Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) recognises that athletes are: inspirational leaders, agents of change, advocates for integrity, ambassadors for respect, impartiality and non-discrimination.
    • The CGF is supportive of freedom of expression and trusts, respects and understands that athletes may want to make positive expressions of their values in line with the CGF values of Humanity, Equality and Destiny.
    • Any such positive expressions of values are subject to the CGF Charter of Good Conduct.
  • Code of Ethics, opens in a new tab, Paris 2024, (October 2021). The Paris 2024 Code of Ethics is the reference document that will, through to 2024, guide the actions of all the partners, volunteers and actors involved in the organisation of the Games. It is a text that expresses a commitment and which seeks to embody the principles of integrity, neutrality and fair play, in which we firmly believe. It is the essential foundation of the relationship of trust that we hope to forge with the public and all stakeholders in successfully creating a new Games model with them.
  • Sustainability policy, opens in a new tab, Gold Coast 2018 XXI Commonwealth Games, (September 2017). We are committed to the following governing principles of sustainable development: Inclusivity – To ensure that all interested parties are able to participate without fear of discrimination; Integrity – To conduct GC2018 in an ethical manner, consistent with international standards of behaviour; Stewardship – To take responsibility for the economic, environmental and social outcomes to be shared by all; Transparency – To communicate willingly and openly about the decisions and activities that affect the social, environmental and economic outcomes of our actions; Leadership – To demonstrate leadership by delivering GC2018 to international standards, constantly improving our ways of working and meeting all legal and other requirements. Related documents include:
    • Sustainability, opens in a new tab [website], Gold Coast 2018, (accessed 5 November 2025). As a transformational event, GC2018 presents a unique opportunity to demonstrate leadership in sustainability by delivering to international standards of best practice, leaving positive economic, environmental, social and community legacies that last beyond the Closing Ceremony.
    • Approach to Human Rights, opens in a new tab, Gold Coast 2018 XXI Commonwealth Games, (August 2018). A key purpose of this document is to demonstrate GOLDOC’s commitment and approach to human rights in the planning and delivery of GC2018.
    • The Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games Reconciliation Action Plan, opens in a new tab, Gold Coast 2018 XXI Commonwealth Games, (November 2017). Our vision is to deliver a great Games that will recognise, respect and celebrate Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures. GC2018 will leave a lasting and meaningful legacy through: employment and training; procurement; showcasing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander arts and cultures; building a culturally capable workforce and providing authentic Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural experiences for GC2018 and beyond.
    • Towards a Sustainable GC2018, opens in a new tab, Gold Coast 2018 XXI Commonwealth Games, (September 2017). This sustainability framework “Towards a sustainable GC2018” was first published in 2014. Since that time, the organisation has undergone significant growth and evolution. Therefore, to ensure that GOLDOC’s approach to sustainability continues to evolve and in accordance with GOLDOC’s commitment to continual improvement, this document has been reviewed with minor updates incorporated.
  • Approach to human rights, opens in a new tab, Glasgow 2014 XX Commonwealth Games, (December 2013). The five key strands of this Strategy are: – Inclusive design & service delivery – Inclusive and accessible communications – A diverse and aware Games workforce – Supplier diversity – Targeted engagement.
  • Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ Framework, opens in a new tab, United Nations, (2011). The Human Rights Council endorsed the Guiding Principles in its resolution 17/4 of 16 June 2011. These Guiding Principles are grounded in recognition of: (a) States’ existing obligations to respect, protect and fulfil human rights and fundamental freedoms; (b) The role of business enterprises as specialized organs of society performing specialized functions, required to comply with all applicable laws and to respect human rights; (c) The need for rights and obligations to be matched to appropriate and effective remedies when breached. These Guiding Principles apply to all States and to all business enterprises, both transnational and others, regardless of their size, sector, location, ownership and structure.

  • Sport for good: free online short courses, opens in a new tab, Torrens University Australia, (accessed 5 November 2025). Our free online short courses are designed to teach you about the power of sport as a platform for change. It will empower you with the knowledge and tools on how you can use sport to change the world. Designed to be relevant to a range of interests, from sports management to community services, these eight to ten-hour courses explore the history of sports activism, the changing landscape and the global challenges of modern sport through interviews with athletes who are leading the charge for change.
  • The Mega-Sporting Event Lifecycle: Embedding Human Rights from Vision to Legacy, opens in a new tab, Mega-Sporting Events Platform for Human Rights, (April 2018). Mega-sporting events (MSE) are the pinnacle of global sport, but cannot stand apart from their very significant social impacts – both positive and negative. Sporting events can enhance freedoms and celebrate human dignity, but can also amplify discrimination and abuse. It is critical to ensure that the world of sport is in full alignment with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UN Guiding Principles) and other international human rights and related instruments, principles, and standards. This guide presents the lifecycle of a mega-sporting event, with specific elements of good practice at each stage that those involved in hosting the event should integrate into their planning, delivery and legacy in order to ensure a rights-compliant event.

  • The Centre for Sport and Human Rights, opens in a new tab, (accessed 5 November 2025). Our mission is to advance a world of sport that fully respects and promotes human rights by generating awareness, building capacity and delivering impact. We pursue our mission by upholding and promoting the Sporting Chance Principles, engaging those affected and strengthening accountability through collective action in: Enabling Prevention of human rights violations linked to sport; Ensuring Remedy that is effective, accessible and available for those who experience human rights abuses; and Harnessing Opportunities to promote human rights in sport that contribute to positive impacts and benefits for all.
    • Sporting Chance Principles, opens in a new tab, (2018). The Sporting Chance Principles were developed by the Advisory Council to affirm a shared commitment to realising human rights in and through sport. All Advisory Council members endorse the Sporting Chance Principles and work individually and collectively to implement them in cooperation with other partners.
    • Games time: Planning and acting to respect human rights in mega-sporting events, opens in a new tab, (April 2020). Games Time is designed to support organisations and authorities involved in the final preparation and delivery of major sporting events in their efforts to ensure respect for international human rights standards. In the overall lifecycle of a major sporting event, the final six months (‘games time’) are critical not only to delivery of the event, but also to ensuring human rights are protected. This Guide helps organisers do this important work.
  • Sport and Rights Alliance, opens in a new tab, (accessed 5 November 2025). Engaging directly with the IOC, FIFA, and other global sport bodies, we have played pivotal roles in landmark decisions by these organisations to adopt new policies, include human rights bidding criteria for mega-events, and host city contract clauses that embed their responsibilities to respect human rights, child rights, freedom of expression laws, labour standards, and anti-corruption measures.

Back to top

Working together for Australian sport

C4S-Footer-Sport Integrity Australia logo
C4S-Footer-Sport Integrity Australia logo
C4S-Footer-Australian Sports Foundation logo
C4S-Footer-Australian Sports Foundation logo
C4S-Footer-Australian Olympic Committee
C4S-Footer-Australian Olympic Committee
C4S-Footer-Paralympics Australia logo
C4S-Footer-Paralympics Australia logo
C4S-Footer-Commonwealth Games Australia logo
C4S-Footer-Commonwealth Games Australia logo
C4S-Footer-SAHOF
C4S-Footer-SAHOF
C4S-Footer-Invictus Australia logo
C4S-Footer-Invictus Australia logo
C4S-Footer-PLA
C4S-Footer-PLA
C4S-Footer-ACT Gov
C4S-Footer-ACT Gov
C4S-Footer-NSW Gov
C4S-Footer-NSW Gov
C4S-Footer-NT Gov
C4S-Footer-NT Gov
C4S-Footer-QLD Gov
C4S-Footer-QLD Gov
C4S-Footer-SA Gov
C4S-Footer-SA Gov
C4S-Footer-Tas Gov
C4S-Footer-Tas Gov
C4S-Footer-Vic Gov
C4S-Footer-Vic Gov
C4S-Footer-WA Gov
C4S-Footer-WA Gov
C4S-Footer-ACTAS
C4S-Footer-ACTAS
C4S-Footer-NSWIS
C4S-Footer-NSWIS
C4S-Footer-NT
C4S-Footer-NT
C4S-Footer-QAS
C4S-Footer-QAS
C4S-Footer-SASI
C4S-Footer-SASI
C4S-Footer-TIS
C4S-Footer-TIS
C4S-Footer-VIS
C4S-Footer-VIS
C4S-Footer-WAIS
C4S-Footer-WAIS
First Nations Flags, the Aboriginal flag and the Torres Strait Islander flag.
The Clearinghouse for Sport pay our respects to the Traditional Owners of Country throughout Australia. We pay our respects to Elders past and present, and acknowledge the valuable contribution Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people make to Australian society and sport.