This recent statement by the Paris Boxing Unit (which was in charge of the rules for boxing this time) and the IOC (who gave them that job) 'explains' why they are sticking by what they have done. Its interesting reading. Quoting in bold, my comments are below. I ended up quoting the whole thing (and thank you to @Iwanttoretire whose post led me to this).
https://olympics.com/ioc/news/joint-paris-2024-boxing-unit-ioc-statement
First sentence:
Every person has the right to practise sport without discrimination.
This is a statement about the Olympics - which is not just 'a right to practice sport'. This is a competition which for decades has been held to the highest standard. A peak of sporting achievement and sportsmanship which athletes aspire to. Its something that children look up to and show interest in, a goal at the start of their sporting career. The problems for IOC have been that they are inclusive to the point of being okay with the rapist of a 12 year old to take part and to not look too closely at the sex of boxers in the womens' boxing part of the event. That may (arguable) not be a problem for lesser contests. It is a problem as the starting point for the Olympics. Literally no-one can be denied the right to take part as this would be 'discrimination'.
This refers to some amended wording made to the Olympic Charter (Sept 2023) and which come into force for the first time in these games. https://olympics.com/ioc/news/olympic-charter-amendments-approved-by-141st-ioc-session The changes are around broading the respect of international human rights. As the link above mentions 'The change is a result of the work by the Legal Affairs Commission and its consultation with the Advisory Committee on Human Rights'.
Interesting that women wearing hijab are not permitted.
The next bit ...
All athletes participating in the boxing tournament of the Olympic Games Paris 2024 comply with the competition’s eligibility and entry regulations, as well as all applicable medical regulations set by the Paris 2024 Boxing Unit (PBU) (please find all applicable rules here). As with previous Olympic boxing competitions, the gender and age of the athletes are based on their passport.
My underlining. The rules are about weight classes, quotas and how each country qualifies, so all athletes may qualify BUT those rules are irrelevant. The important part is the last sentence which is underlined. They next point out how long those rules have been in force. This is something that they rely on. Its our fault it seems for not challenging earlier!
These rules also applied during the qualification period, including the boxing tournaments of the 2023 European Games, Asian Games, Pan American Games and Pacific Games, the ad hoc 2023 African qualifying tournament in Dakar (SEN) and two world qualifying tournaments held in Busto Arsizio (ITA) and Bangkok (THA) in 2024, which involved a total of 1,471 different boxers from 172 National Olympic Committees (NOCs), the Boxing Refugee Team and Individual Neutral Athletes, and featured over 2,000 qualification bouts.
The PBU used the Tokyo 2020 boxing rules as a baseline to develop its regulations for Paris 2024. This was to minimise the impact on athletes’ preparations and guarantee consistency between Olympic Games. These Tokyo 2020 rules were based on the post-Rio 2016 rules, which were in place before the suspension of the boxing International Federation by the IOC in 2019 and the subsequent withdrawal of its recognition in 2023.
It ensures consistency and (in contrast with the 'bad' IBA which did gender testing within a competition and removed medals already won in that contest the PBU/ICO are 'consistent'. Next mentions that the atheletes at Paris have competed before (Tokyo). Including in IBA contests.
We have seen in reports misleading information about two female athletes competing at the Olympic Games Paris 2024. The two athletes have been competing in international boxing competitions for many years in the women’s category, including the Olympic Games Tokyo 2020, International Boxing Association (IBA) World Championships and IBA-sanctioned tournaments.
Bear with me. The next part talks about why doing what the IBA did (testing promptly once having doubts about the XX status of boxers) is wrong.
These two athletes were the victims of a sudden and arbitrary decision by the IBA. Towards the end of the IBA World Championships in 2023, they were suddenly disqualified without any due process.
According to the IBA minutes available on their website, this decision was initially taken solely by the IBA Secretary General and CEO. The IBA Board only ratified it afterwards and only subsequently requested that a procedure to follow in similar cases in the future be established and reflected in the IBA Regulations. The minutes also say that the IBA should “establish a clear procedure on gender testing”.
The current aggression against these two athletes is based entirely on this arbitrary decision, which was taken without any proper procedure – especially considering that these athletes had been competing in top-level competition for many years.
Such an approach is contrary to good governance.
The IBA did not decide in advance that there were specific rules to follow re gender testing? Other posters have referred to the atheletes boxing in IBA contests having to be XX to compete as a woman so perhaps they - mistakenly - did not realise that they needed to spell things out, wait a while and go to full committee. I have no idea what happened but if (say) a whistleblower went to the IBA Secretary General and CEO with concerns - or they became aware - within the contest they should not have decided to test promptly to remove doubt. In PBU/ICO mind there is no urgency here at all.
Eligibility rules should not be changed during ongoing competition, and any rule change must follow appropriate processes and should be based on scientific evidence.
I think from this we should see that there is no way that the ICO will require testing in Paris. Its not going to happen. That would be 'bad governance' (tut). BTW I don't think that eligibility rules were changed, it was a woman's competition for ... XX women.
The IOC is committed to protecting the human rights of all athletes participating in the Olympic Games as per the Olympic Charter, the IOC Code of Ethics and the IOC Strategic Framework on Human Rights. The IOC is saddened by the abuse that the two athletes are currently receiving.
No mention of the human rights of women. No suggestion that they are considering any complaints. I suspect there is no system to complain and without a system in advance ...
The IBA’s recognition was withdrawn by the IOC in 2023 following its suspension in 2019. The withdrawal of recognition was confirmed by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). See the IOC’s statement following the ruling.
This IOC statement welcomed its success at appeal and notes that one of the reasons that CAS did not uphold the appeal was linked to a change of culture at IAB being required. There was no suggestion in the linked document that gender testing was why IAB was removed (unless being less GC was part of the culture change?). The banning was about transparency in finances and selection of judges.
The IOC has made it clear that it needs National Boxing Federations to reach a consensus around a new International Federation in order for boxing to be included on the sports programme of the Olympic Games LA28.
So without coming into line with IOC there will not be boxing in the 2028 Olympics. Which leads neatly to the supporting-IOC statement by World Boxing President (also 1st August). They want to be in charge of boxing for 2028 and think that the IOC are making all the right decisions on this one
apnews.com/article/olympics-2024-boxing-gender-382edf5dca7479f92e874cfd39375af1