Page 15 - THE INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE’S ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HARMFUL CONSEQUENCES OF THE OLYMPIC GAMES- A MULTI-METHOD INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ANALYSIS Ryan Gautier

Chapter One – Introduction
This research focuses on the IOC, an international actor. In light of this, I shall use the definition of accountability posed by international relations scholars Ruth W. Grant and Robert O. Keohane. ‘Accountability’, according to Grant and Keohane, is a situation where “some actors have the right to hold other actors to a set of standards, to judge whether they have fulfilled their responsibilities in light of these standards, and to impose sanctions if they determine that these responsibilities have not been met.”21 This definition is also useful as it has already been used in examining the accountability of FIFA, another international sports organisation, one that is second only to the IOC in global influence.22
In essence, Grant and Keohane’s definition of accountability breaks down to four components. First, there is an actor that is to be held to account. This actor may be an individual, or may be an entity—a state, a corporation, or a NGO. The second component is the presence of an accountability forum, to whom is account to be rendered. This forum may be formal, such as a parliament, courts, or an ombudsperson. The forum may also be informal, such as monitoring by civil society, or reporting by the media. The forum may be internally agreed-upon, or may be externally-imposed. The third component of accountability is the existence of standards set out to which the actor is accountable for. These standards may be positive, requiring the achievement of a particular goal or following certain procedures, or negative, requiring the actor to refrain from engaging in certain activities. Finally, the fourth component of accountability is consequences for meeting or failing to meet the standards. Although Grant and Keohane use the term ‘sanctions’, I prefer the term ‘consequences’. Sanctions are generally limited to punishments for negative outcomes, while ‘consequences’ also considers rewards for positive outcomes.23 Consequences may be formal, such as financial awards, disciplinary measures, civil remedies, or penal sanctions. Consequences may also be informal, such as positive or negative media coverage.
Accountability is different from liability. Liability connotes a legal obligation, while accountability does not require such an obligation.24 As such, liability is a narrower
21 Ruth W. Grant and Robert O. Keohane, ‘Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics’ (2005) 99 American Political Science Review 29, 29.
22 Roger Pielke Jr., ‘How Can FIFA be Held Accountable?’ (2013) 16 Sport Management Review 255, 256.
23 Bovens, ‘Two Concepts of Accountability’ (n 18) 952.
24 Black’s Law Dictionary (3rd Pocket ed., 2006) 426.
5