Page 30 - THE INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE’S ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HARMFUL CONSEQUENCES OF THE OLYMPIC GAMES- A MULTI-METHOD INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ANALYSIS Ryan Gautier

Chapter One – Introduction
will return to in Chapter Two. However, the global authority that the IOC (a ‘mere’ NGO) wields, makes for what is perhaps a unique actor in global governance.
In carrying out the case study, this research relies on documentary evidence. Use of primary documents, namely those of the IOC that are used in organising the Olympic Games, are central to the analysis. These include legal documents such as the Olympic Charter or the Host City Contract, but also documents such as the questionnaires the IOC sets out for prospective host cities. Secondary literature is also used to obtain insight into the Games, particularly into the conduct of prior editions of the Games.
4.2. Principal-Agent Approach
In addressing issues of accountability, Chapter Six of this thesis uses a principal-agent approach. The IOC does not organise the Games itself, but delegates the task to three particular organisations—the OCOG, the Host City, and the host country’s NOC. Since it is these organisations that directly oversee the Games, they have a responsibility to ensure that the Games are carried out to the standards expected of the IOC.
A principal-agent approach assists in analysing situations when activities engaged in by agents do not line up with the wishes of the principal. In a sense, it is an examination of the accountability of an agent to a principal. Using such an approach also helps unpack problems created by having multiple actors engaged in an activity. If the IOC has provided a mandate to those who organise the Games to avoid some of the worst outcomes of the Games, and the agents are not fulfilling this mandate, a principal-agent approach may be able to address issues of accountability, and of ensuring that the organisers live up to their responsibilities.
4.3. Comparative Legal Methodology
This thesis engages in comparative analyses, both implicitly, and explicitly. Implicitly, it relies on a ‘vertical’ comparative analysis between domestic actors and international actors, while it explicitly engages in a ‘horizontal’ comparative analysis between international
20