Imane Khelif breaks silence after leaked medical report ‘proves Olympic gender-row boxer is a biological male'
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
IMANE KHELIF has issued a response after a leaked medical report claimed the gold medal-winning Olympian was a "biological male".
Khelif, 26, won Algeria's first-ever female gold medal in boxing during the Paris Games in 2024.
2
Imane Khelif won Algeria's first-ever gold medal in women's boxing at the Paris Olympics
Credit: Reuters
2
But the gender row which plagued Khelif then has now resurfaced from a leaked medical report
Credit: AP
However, during Khelif's run to the final, she was embroiled in a bitter gender row after being banned from International Boxing Association competition in 2023.
The IBA banned Khelif after tests taken in New Delhi allegedly produced the DNA of a 'male'.
The IOC - who replaced the IBA as the Olympic's boxing governing body - were warned about the tests and urged to remove Khelif from the competition.
But Khelif was allowed to box in Paris because of her female passport status.
Now, the alleged sex-test results from the 2023 World Championships have been published for the first time by 3 Wire Sports, and suggest the boxer is biologically male.
American journalist Alan Abrahamson produced the result of a test said to have been carried out on the boxer in New Delhi in March 2023 - which triggered the boxer's disqualification.
The document published summarises the findings on Khelif as 'abnormal', stating: 'Chromosome analysis reveals male karyotype."
A karyotype refers to an individual's complete set of chromosomes, which in Khelif's case has been reported by (IBA) as being XY, the male pattern.
Khelif refused to respond directly to the claims in a social media post on Monday, instead focusing on her work as a Unicef ambassador - a role she has held since January 2024.
The post featured a photo of Khelif wearing a blue polo bearing the organisation's logo as she made a heart symbol with her hands to celebrate the "Global Day of Parents".
Imane Khelif wins Olympic gold in women's welterweight final after huge gender row that has grabbed worldwide attention
She paid tribute to her own parents in the caption, saying: "Today, I became a champion, but it all started long ago. When my parents believed in me, even when the dream felt too big.
"When they supported me, listened to me, and stood by me. Being a parent isn't easy. There's no manual. But the love, patience, and trust you give your child can change everything.
"On this #GlobalDayOfParents, I just want to say thank you. Thank you to every parent who chooses, every single day, to be there for their children.
"Together with @unicefalgerie, I'm celebrating these everyday heroes. Because when parents are supported, children can dream and succeed."
The alleged test results disputing Khelif's gender carry the letterhead of Dr Lal PathLabs in New Delhi, accredited by the American College of Pathologists and certified by the Swiss-based International Organisation for Standardisation.
This directly challenges what IOC spokesman Mark Adams said in a tense news conference at the Paris Olympics.
He described the results that saw Khelif banned as 'ad hoc' and 'not legitimate'.
IOC president Thomas Bach even claimed that the results are the product of a Russian-led misinformation campaign.
It followed after the IBA - headed by Russia's Umar Kremlev - had been stripped of IOC recognition in a row over ethics and financial management.
Khelif has always denied being a biological male and even named JK Rowling and Elon Musk in a cyberbullying lawsuit.
And the 26-year-old has vowed to fight on, even eyeing another gold at the 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles.
But World Boxing has ruled that Khelif is ineligible to enter future events as a woman without first submitting to the same chromosome testing that has already triggered the boxer's disqualification at global level.
The governing body - provisionally approved to run Olympic boxing in LA - announced that all athletes in its competitions over 18 years old must undergo a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) genetic test to determine their sex.
The test detects chromosomal material through a mouth swab, saliva or blood.
Khelif has failed to provide any evidence of having female chromosomes in the nine months since the gender scandal erupted.
In February, Khelif spoke out in her defence and wrote: 'For two years, I have taken the high road while my name and image have been used, unauthorised, to further personal and political agendas through the spreading and dissemination of baseless lies and misinformation. But silence is no longer an option.
'The IBA, an organisation that I am no longer associated with and which is no longer recognised by the IOC, have again made baseless accusations that are false and offensive, using them to further their agenda...
'My team is carefully reviewing the situation and will take all necessary legal steps to ensure that my rights and the principles of fair competition are upheld."
An IOC spokesperson told Sun Sport: "The IOC has always made it clear that eligibility criteria are the responsibility of the respective International Federation.
"The factors that matter to sports performance are unique to each sport, discipline, and/or event.
"We await the full details how sex testing will be implemented in a safe, fair and legally enforceable way."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
27 minutes ago
- Reuters
Supreme Court spares US gun companies from Mexico's lawsuit
WASHINGTON, June 5 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday spared two American gun companies from a lawsuit by Mexico's government accusing them of aiding illegal firearms trafficking to drug cartels and fueling gun violence in the southern neighbor of the United States. The justices in a 9-0 ruling overturned a lower court's ruling that had allowed the lawsuit to proceed against firearms maker Smith & Wesson (SWBI.O), opens new tab and distributor Interstate Arms. The lower court had found that Mexico plausibly alleged that the companies aided and abetted illegal gun sales, harming its government. The companies had argued for the dismissal of Mexico's suit, filed in Boston in 2021, under a 2005 U.S. law called the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act that broadly shields gun companies from liability for crimes committed with their products. The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decided in 2024 that the alleged conduct by the companies fell outside these protections. "Mexico alleges that the companies aided and abetted unlawful sales routing guns to Mexican drug cartels. The question presented is whether Mexico's complaint plausibly pleads that conduct. We conclude it does not," liberal Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the court. The case came to the Supreme Court at a complicated time for U.S.-Mexican relations as President Donald Trump pursues on-again, off-again tariffs on Mexican goods. Trump has also accused Mexico of doing too little to stop the flow of synthetic drugs such as fentanyl and migrant arrivals at the border. Mexico's lawsuit, filed in Boston in 2021, accused the two companies of violating various U.S. and Mexican laws. Mexico claims that the companies have deliberately maintained a distribution system that included firearms dealers who knowingly sell weapons to third-party, or "straw," purchasers who then traffic guns to cartels in Mexico. The suit also accused the companies of unlawfully designing and marketing their guns as military-grade weapons to drive up demand among the cartels, including by associating their products with the American military and law enforcement. The gun companies said they make and sell lawful products. To avoid its lawsuit being dismissed under the 2005 law, Mexico was required to plausibly allege that the companies aided and abetted illegal gun sales and that such conduct was the "proximate cause" - a legal principle involving who is responsible for causing an injury - of the harms claimed by Mexico. Mexico in the lawsuit sought monetary damages of an unspecified amount and a court order requiring Smith & Wesson and Interstate Arms to take steps to "abate and remedy the public nuisance they have created in Mexico." Gun violence fueled by trafficked U.S.-made firearms has contributed to a decline in business investment and economic activity in Mexico and forced its government to incur unusually high costs on services including healthcare, law enforcement and the military, according to the lawsuit. Mexico, a country with strict firearms laws, has said most of its gun homicides are committed with weapons trafficked from the United States and valued at more than $250 million annually. The Supreme Court heard arguments in the case on March 4.
Daily Mail
35 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Supreme Court makes it easier to claim 'reverse discrimination' in employment, in a case from Ohio
WASHINGTON (AP) - A unanimous Supreme Court made it easier Thursday to bring lawsuits over so-called reverse discrimination, siding with an Ohio woman who claims she didn´t get a job and then was demoted because she is straight. The justices´ decision affects lawsuits in 20 states and the District of Columbia where, until now, courts had set a higher bar when members of a majority group, including those who are white and heterosexual, sue for discrimination under federal law. The court ruled in an appeal from Marlean Ames, who has worked for the Ohio Department of Youth Services for more than 20 years. Ames contends she was passed over for a promotion and then demoted because she is heterosexual. Both the job she sought and the one she had held were given to LGBTQ people. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bars sex discrimination in the workplace. A trial court and the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Ames. The 6th circuit is among the courts that had required an additional requirement for people like Ames, showing "background circumstances" that might include that LGBTQ people made the decisions affecting Ames or statistical evidence of a pattern of discrimination against members of the majority group. The appeals court noted that Ames didn´t provide any such circumstances.
Reuters
36 minutes ago
- Reuters
Spain pays first arbitration award in long-running renewable subsidies dispute
MADRID, June 5 (Reuters) - The Spanish government has agreed to pay 32 million euros ($37 million) to a U.S. fund to end a legal dispute tied to renewable energy subsidies that were cut over a decade ago, an Energy Ministry spokesperson said on Thursday. Foreign investors, mostly investment funds, took legal action against Spain after the previous conservative government cut renewables subsidies in 2013 to reduce a power tariff deficit built up through years of artificially low prices. U.S. fund Blasket Renewable Investments had acquired the rights to the award from Japan's JGC Holdings Corporation, which won it under a 2021 ruling by the World Bank's International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. In 2024, the court shot down Spain's attempt to annul the decision. Since the arbitration proceeding was from a non-EU investor, the payment doesn't clash with a March decision by the European Commission that told Spain not to pay up in a similar case as it would be a breach of EU state aid rules - which prevent governments from giving unfair advantages to one firm over competitors. Cases from non-EU investors represent only 5% of the total, the spokesperson said, adding that Spain continued to pursue all legal avenues to defend its interests. So far, Spain has been ordered to pay around 1.5 billion euros in various cases and the country has been able to reduce by 85% the amount demanded by investors, the spokesperson said. ($1 = 0.8754 euros)
