The British Olympic Committee (BOC) this week reignited the debate on whether athletes heading to Beijing will be allowed to voice opinions on human rights, Tibet and other politically sensitive issues by adding a controversial new ‘gag’ clause to its athletes’ contracts. After vehement criticism from opposition MPs and Tibet support groups, the BOC was forced to back away.

The clause of the contract in question stated: “[Athletes] are not to comment on any politically sensitive issues” and referred athletes to section 51 of the International Olympic Committee charter, which “provides for no kind of demonstration, or political, religious or racial propaganda in the Olympic sites, venues and other areas”.

The BOC confirmed to the UK’s Mail on Sunday newspaper that any athlete refusing to sign the agreement would not be allowed to travel to Beijing and that breach of this contract while in Beijing would result in athletes being sent home.

However, following strong opposition reported in the British press, the British Olympic Association has agreed to revisit the language used in the athletes’ contract.

Other countries including the US, Canada, Finland and Australia, have pledged that their athletes will be free to express opinions on almost any issue, including China-Tibet relations and human rights issues in China.

In August 2007, the head of the Australian Olympic Committee, John Coates, stated that Australian athletes are “entitled to have their opinions and express them”.

Only New Zealand and Belgium have banned their athletes from expressing political views while competing at this year’s Olympics.