The case revolves around Angel Perez, a Cuban-born athlete who sought to compete for the United States in the 2000 Sydney Olympic Games. Perez, who represented Cuba in the 1992 Barcelona Olympics, defected to the U.S. in 1993 and later obtained permanent residency and U.S. citizenship in 1999. The U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC) requested the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to allow Perez to compete, but the IOC denied the request, citing Rule 46 of the Olympic Charter, which mandates a three-year waiting period after changing nationality unless the original National Olympic Committee (NOC) consents. Cuba refused to grant this consent, leading Perez and the USOC to challenge the decision at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ad hoc Division.
Perez argued that he had been a U.S. national for over three years or, alternatively, that he was stateless after leaving Cuba in 1993. The CAS initially dismissed his application but later reconsidered the case with new evidence, including a letter from the U.S. Ambassador asserting his nationality. The Panel examined the issues of nationality and statelessness under the Olympic Charter and Swiss law, rejecting Perez's claim of U.S. nationality due to insufficient legal evidence. However, it accepted his argument of de facto statelessness, citing Cuban laws that stripped defectors of fundamental rights, such as freedom of movement and social benefits. The Panel referenced international legal principles, including works by Paul Weis and Guy Goodwin, which define statelessness as losing one nationality without acquiring another, whether formally (de jure) or effectively (de facto).
The Panel ruled that Perez's statelessness exempted him from the three-year waiting period, as the term "change" in the Olympic Charter's Bye-law could include transitions from nationality to statelessness. This interpretation aligned with the Charter's emphasis on athletes' interests and the spirit of competition as between individuals rather than nations. The decision overturned the IOC's initial ruling, declaring Perez eligible to represent the U.S. in the 2000 Olympics. The case highlights the complex interplay between national law, international legal principles, and Olympic regulations, underscoring the challenges faced by athletes in navigating nationality disputes. It also reflects broader ethical and legal considerations surrounding statelessness and the rights of individuals in international sports. The Panel's ruling balanced regulatory integrity with fairness, ultimately prioritizing Perez's eligibility based on his de facto stateless status.