Since the first games in Athens, Greece, in 1896, the Olympics has been known as the pinnacle of athletic achievement. Yet, the recent inclusion of Dutch volleyball player Steven van de Velde in the 2024 Paris Summer Olympics has cast a dark shadow over these ideals. Van de Velde, a convicted child rapist, was sentenced to four years in prison after committing an unthinkable crime against a British schoolgirl. Despite this, he was granted the privilege to compete on the world’s biggest stage. This inclusion not only raises serious ethical concerns about the Olympic Committee, but also exposes the disturbing double standards within the Olympic Games.
Following van de Velde’s sentencing, the judge told him that “The hopes of [him] representing [his] country now lies as a shattered dream,” according to The Telegraph. Although this statement should have marked the end of van de Velde’s athletic career, he somehow was still allowed to wear his nation’s colors in Paris.
What makes this situation even more appalling are the special accommodations granted to van de Velde during the Games. Unlike other athletes, he was not required to stay in the Olympic Village, a space designed to house and feed competitors. Instead, he was provided with private accommodations and was escorted out of each match by private security to avoid any interaction with the press. These exceptions only further highlight the preferential treatment he received—treatment that stands in direct contrast to how other athletes have been penalized for far less severe infractions.
Meanwhile, athletes like Sha’Carri Richardson were banned from the Tokyo Olympics over far less severe issues, such as testing positive for marijuana. This glaring double standard not only undermines the integrity of the Games but also sends a troubling message about what behavior is tolerated in the pursuit of gold.
The decision to permit van de Velde’s participation is not just a slap in the face to the Olympic values but also to the victims of sexual assault worldwide. How can we expect to minimize and raise awareness of this heinous crime when the committee for the fourth most viewed sports event in the world allows for an assailant like van de Velde to compete? The Netherlands’ Olympic Committee defended the choice to let Van de Velde play by noting he’d served his sentence, completed a rehabilitation program and was determined to be at no risk of reoffending, according to Forbes.
The Olympics are supposed to represent traits of unity, sportsmanship, and integrity, but by allowing van de Velde to compete, the Olympic Committee has sent a message that such values are secondary to talent and athletic achievement.
