Could the Riots in England lead to London losing Host City status for the 2012 Olympic and Paralympics games?

Image via Wikipedia

There are 352 days to go, but will the 2012 Games still take place in London, and are we ready?

Watching the riots in England spread across the country like a folded up rug, from the other side of the Atlantic, I feel deeply disheartened, marginally scared, and ashamed. Many Canadians and Americans that I have spoken to in the last few days have questioned what on earth is happening “over there” – asking how has the riots have become so organised and spread so rapidly.

The view from across the pond is that London and the UK are in an anarchic state of chaos. The Police are taking a lot of criticism about their response to the situation, and questions are obviously being asked about whether London is ready, or indeed able, to provide security for the Olympic Games next year, and what strategies are in place with the games just 352 days away.

Appointment of Bill Bratton ”Supercop”

Prime Minister David Cameron, and Home Secretary, Theresa May, are coming under increasing pressure to take action and bring order to the UK streets. The recent announcement that  Bill Bratton (described as a supercop) will act as a consultant to the Government has drawn criticism from the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO).  I for one would be interested to know Mr Bratton’s level of remuneration (or perhaps he is proposing to do the work on a pro bono basis);  how he will be taxed; how long his appointment will be for, and where he will be based; what level of responsibility will he have; who will he report to; will an reports be published; where the money is coming from, and whether he will be designated as a “constable” (with a warrant car etc), under the Police Act, or Serious Organised Crime and Police Act.

The Home Office – Security and Safety Strategy 

Earlier this year the Home Office published a Safety and Security Strategy specifically for the London Olympic and Paralympics Games. Here is an extract of the “perceived risks”: 

“The Olympic Strategic Threat Assessment (OSTA) assesses the threats and hazards which may jeopardise the safety and security of the Games.

These will fall into the following categories:

• terrorism
• serious crime
• domestic extremism and public disorder
• natural hazards.”

Click here for a link to the 23 page document – NB: that Public disorder is only referred to once (as listed above) in the entire document, and also that the risk of a pandemic is also not mentioned – perhaps this is no longer de rigueur in government circles?  I hope that there are more detailed contingency plans in operation that bolster the current Strategy document, as I have seen more detailed explanatory memoranda to new legislation.

The riots would fall into either public disorder/domestic extremism/serious crime categories. The strategy document is rather sketchy on detail – save that it does set out which agency or organisation is responsible for each part of the implementation of each separate pillar of the strategy. The “pillars” are:

Protect:

• People Personnel security; Accreditation; VIP protection; Venue Site and venue security; CBRNE Non-venue Transport security; Border security CCTV.

Prepare :

• Olympic resilience; Specialist response; COSI

 Identify and Disrupt

• Olympic intelligence; Covert Serious and organised crime; Volume crime; Automatic Number Plate Recognition;

Command, Control, Plan and Resource

• National coordination; Operational control infrastructure; Airwave; Resources Demand and resource; Training Operational logistics; infrastructure.

 Engage

• International relations; Community relationships; Prevent Industry.

 Putting aside the ambiguous marketing spiel of the “pillars”, which subsection listed above can you put your finger on and honestly say that (admittedly out of the context of the Games themselves, but can I do not expect a new regime to fall into place before then) has been effectual in the last few days. Not many I grant you – especially the many community relationships that have been shattered.

 Also how effective will CCTV and number plate recognition be if you have a throng of rioters running towards an Olympic venue, VIP cars (VIP car lanes are another contentious issue which I think will cause great divide in the capital) or security officers?

 My fear is that rioting groups could become organised in the build up to the 2012 Games and police officers will be empowered under wide-ranging serious organised crime statues to make arrests, and perhaps even invoke the wide-ranging powers under the seemingly forgotten Civil Contingencies Act.

 Could Host City status for the 2012 Games be taken away from London?

The Daily Telegraph is reporting that Olympic officials are in London this week reviewing security arrangements in the capital. Associated Press has also posted a video on YouTube setting out further concerns about security.

This led me to ponder several hypothetical questions: Could the 2012 Games potentially be taken away from London due to fears of rioting or other security concerns; and has it been envisaged that an Olympic Games might not take place in any given year? The answers surprised me!

The Olympic Charter

It takes a long time to hunt down the most up to date (from 8 July 2011) Olympic Charter (click here for a link). I would like to highlight section 2 of the Fundamental Principles of Olympism for context:

• “The goal of Olympism is to place sport at the service of the harmonious development of humankind, with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity”

Section 32 refers to the non celebration of the Olympic Games in the following terms: “The non-celebration of the Olympic Games during the year in which they should be held entails the cancellation of the rights of the host city, without prejudice to any other rights of the IOC”.

However, rule 34 provides that:

“All sports competition must take place in the host city of the Olympic Games, unless the IOC Executive Board authorises the organisation of certain events in other cities, sites or venues situated in the same country. The Opening and Closing Ceremonies must take place in the host city itself. The location, sites and venues for any sports or other events of any kind must all be approved by the IOC Executive Board.

 The situation seems to be different for the Winter Olympics (34.2): “ For the Olympic Winter Games, when for geographical or topographical reasons it is impossible to organise certain events or disciplines of a sport in the country of the host city, the IOC may, on an exceptional basis, authorise the holding of these in a bordering country”.

 However, Section 36 (“Liabilities”) is where it starts to get interesting (my highlighting):

 “The NOC, the OCOG and the host city are jointly and severally liable for all commitments entered into individually or collectively concerning the organisation and staging of the Olympic Games, excluding the financial responsibility for the organisation and staging of such Games, which shall be entirely assumed jointly and severally by the host city and the OCOG, without prejudice to any liability of any other party, particularly as may result from any guarantee given pursuant to BLR 33. The IOC shall have no financial responsibility whatsoever in respect of the organisation and staging of the Olympic Games.

 And here it is….

 In the event of non compliance with the Olympic Charter or other regulations or instructions of the IOC, or a breach of the obligations entered into by the NOC, the OCOG or the host city, the IOC is entitled to withdraw, at any time and with immediate effect, the organisation of the Olympic Games from the host city, the OCOG and the NOC, without prejudice to compensation for any damage thereby caused to the IOC. In such a case, the NOC, the OCOG, the host city, the country of the host city and all their governmental or other authorities, or any other party, whether at any city, local, state, provincial, other regional or national level, shall have no claim for any form of compensation against the IOC”.

 The theoretical answer would seem to be yes – Host City status could indeed be withdrawn in certain circumstances. I am particularly taken by the ambiguous non compliance with “instructions of the IOC” provision. Would that mean if the IOC ordered London to pull up its security socks that host city status could be withdrawn?

 I think for political and financial reasons (especially investments from sponsors) – it unlikely that it would happen.  However, I would be very interested to read the wording of any insurance cover in place to cover the eventuality of Host City status being withdraw; any exclusion clauses and contingency plans.

 I want the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympics to be commercially successful, entertaining, seamlessly organised, and peaceful; with the UK topping the medal tables for all sporting categories (ever the optimist). Perhaps one way of limiting the risk of riots would be to ban anyone who is prosecuted for causing riots from attending the Games, analogous to how thuggish football fans are banned from football games. Or is that a step too far?

Philip Henson – Partner in the award-winning UK boutique law firm Bargate Murray

www.bargatemurray.com

(For Colm)

Related articles

• British Olympic chief says GB can have record medal haul at London 2012 (guardian.co.uk)
• Coe dismisses 2012 security fears (news.bbc.co.uk)