The Court of Arbitration for Sport and Switzerland Supreme Court had ruled that Semenya must artificially suppress her testosterone to compete in female races.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled in favour of South African runner Caster Semenya in her appeal against a “discriminatory” ruling by the World Athletics which saw her unable to compete in a domiciled 800m race since 2019.
The court ruled 4-3 in favour of Semenya. In their ruling, the judges criticised the earlier decisions by the Court of Arbitration for Sport and Switzerland Supreme Court to rule against her appeals in 2019 and 2020 respectively.
A new rule by World Athletics in 2019 meant the two-time Olympic champion would have to artificially suppress her natural testosterone level in order to compete in some women’s races including the 800m over a condition known as differences in sex development.
This condition means, Semenya, who was legally identified as female at birth and has identified as female her entire life, has a higher natural testosterone level in range of that of male which give her unfair advantages over other females with normal testosterone level in women’s sports.
However, the 32-year-old has refused to artificially suppress her testosterone level and has been unable to compete in races from 400m to one male because of the ban. But she competed in the 5000m race at the 2022 World Athletics Championships but did not advance to the finals.
The latest ruling by Strasbourg-based rights court was a major win for the South African but she would not be able to compete immediately because the World Athletics was not joined in the case, rather it was targeted at the Switzerland’s government over the 2020 Supreme Court ruling against her.
The court also ordered the government of Switzerland to pay the sum of €66,000 to the three-time World Champion for expenses incurred in her legal battle.
After Tuesday’s ruling, the World Athletics said the commission still stands by its decision to put the controversial rule in place in order to protect the women’s category based on detailed experience assessment. But the ruling could force the commission to review the policies.
“We remain of the view that the DSD regulations are a necessary, reasonable and proportionate means of protecting fair competition in the female category as the Court of Arbitration for Sport and Swiss Federal Tribunal both found, after a detailed and expert assessment of the evidence.”
