The debate over who can compete in the women’s category has once again moved to centre stage within the Olympic movement, not because of a firm public decision by the International Olympic Committee –IOC–, but due to a formal letter sent by rights organisations calling for clarity on the operation and scope of the IOC’s working group for the “protection of the women’s category”. The discussion has been simmering for months, but has gained new momentum as key IOC meetings in Milan approach at the end of January 2026.
In this context, two things need to be done that until now have largely been overlooked: to acknowledge —even if belatedly— the value of what the current President, Kirsty Coventry, has already set in motion by placing this issue explicitly on the agenda, and to point out the mistake represented by the IOC’s stance when it chose to cover up what happened in boxing at Paris 2024 instead of addressing it transparently.
The leadership of Kirsty Coventry
It is no small matter that the renewed push to address the protection of the women’s category comes precisely from Coventry’s presidency, which since her arrival at the IOC has highlighted the need for a clearer and more scientific policy on gender eligibility in Olympic sport. The creation of a dedicated working group on this issue is a response to years of gaps, and although many —including athletes and federations— argue that it comes too late, it is important to give credit for bringing to the table something that had not been seriously discussed at an institutional level for far too long.
This effort comes at a time when the lack of clarity has generated uncertainty among athletes, federations and rights advocates. The fact that there is now a formal space to debate criteria and methodology —with transparency as a key demand— is a step that should be welcomed.
The Paris 2024 mistake
However, it is impossible to speak about progress without recalling past mistakes. The boxing case at the Paris 2024 Olympic Games, where two boxers —including Imane Khelif— won gold medals despite the existence of medical assessments and serious questions over eligibility, was one of the most controversial episodes in recent Olympic history. The IOC, under the presidency of Thomas Bach, chose to downplay the debate, publicly maintaining that there was “no doubt” about the status of the athletes involved and declining to engage beyond what it considered strictly necessary.
That approach left female boxers —and, by extension, many female athletes— in a situation of institutional vulnerability. Even more troubling is the fact that, according to internal sources, the International Boxing Association (IBA) had notified the IOC’s then Sports Director in writing of all relevant medical test results a year before the Paris Games, including chromosomal indications and genetic issues that could affect eligibility. Despite being aware of this, the Olympic organisation chose to close ranks, avoid a public debate and play down the visibility of that information.
Prioritising an image of normality over scientific clarity and sporting fairness was not only a failure of leadership, but a betrayal of the IOC’s responsibility to protect the integrity of competitive categories. Allowing media noise —and the temptation to avoid conflict— to prevail over an honest management of information was, without doubt, one of the most regrettable moments of recent Olympic governance.
It is not just politics, it is sporting justice
Today, with the IOC’s new initiative —even if late for many— an opportunity emerges to correct mistakes and rebuild credibility in an issue that goes to the heart of sport: ensuring that competition is fair and that the rights of all athletes are respected. The letter from organisations such as the ‘Sport & Rights Alliance’ underlines what many have been calling for for years: transparency, broad consultation, scientific criteria and full respect for human dignity in any decision affecting the participation of women and girls in sport. It is right to welcome movement in that direction.
The value of Kirsty Coventry’s action in driving this necessary debate can and should be recognised. It is positive that the IOC, under her leadership, is beginning to confront an issue that for too long was pushed to the margins. This represents an opportunity to build clear, fair, scientifically grounded policies that respect diversity, equity and justice within global Olympic sport.
