The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has introduced a major new eligibility rule for women’s events in the Olympic Gamesw on March 26, Thursday. This sparked widespread debate across the sporting world. Under the updated policy, athletes will be required to undergo a one-time genetic test based on the SRY gene to determine eligibility, with the aim of ensuring fairness in the female category.
The rule, set to be implemented from the Los Angeles 2028 Olympics, effectively limits participation in women’s events to biological females, significantly impacting transgender athletes and those with Differences of Sexual Development (DSD).
France’s sports minister on Friday called the International Olympic Committee’s decision to introduce genetic testing for women’s events a “step backwards”, warning it raises major ethical, legal and scientific concerns.
Introducing the LA28 Superbloom Collection, a new merch drop to celebrate the launch of the LA28 Look of the Games. Featuring the bold and dynamic fonts and colors of our new visual identity, every piece is designed to bring the Superbloom to life. 💐
Shop the collection here:… pic.twitter.com/508KvnzwHY
— LA28 (@LA28) March 23, 2026
France “takes note” of the decision to require athletes to undergo testing based on the SRY gene, but opposes any broad use of genetic screening, Marina Ferrari said in a statement.
“On behalf of the French government, I wish to express our deep concern regarding this decision,” she said. “We oppose a generalisation of genetic testing that raises numerous ethical, legal and medical questions, particularly in light of French bioethics legislation.”
“These tests, introduced in 1967, were discontinued in 1999 due to strong reservations within the scientific community regarding their relevance. France regrets this step backwards,” Ferrari said.
She added that the policy risked undermining equality by specifically targeting women.
“This decision raises major concerns, as it specifically targets women by introducing a distinction that undermines the principle of equality,” she said.
Ferrari also warned the approach failed to reflect biological diversity, particularly among intersex individuals.
“It defines the female sex without taking into account the biological specificities of intersex individuals, whose sexual characteristics present natural variations, leading to a reductive and potentially stigmatizing approach,” she said.
France remains committed to fairness in competition while safeguarding athletes’ privacy and well-being, Ferrari added, pledging that “every athlete can compete in a respectful, protective environment consistent with the values of French sport.”
She said France would establish a national observatory bringing together sports bodies, scientists, legal experts and athlete representatives to develop recommendations aimed at ensuring sport is “fair, inclusive and respectful of human rights”.
New Zealand on Olympics Gender Testing Policy
On the other hand, New Zealand Olympic Committee on Friday acknowledged the amount of work that went into developing the new Olympic policy on the protection of the female category in elite sport and said it would apply it with “respect and care”.
New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard, who at the Tokyo Olympics in 2021 became the first athlete to compete in a gender category different from that of their birth, would no longer be eligible.
“We recognise the extensive consultation and expert input that has informed this policy … to bring greater clarity, consistency and fairness to eligibility for the female category at the Olympic level,” NZOC Chief Executive Nicki Nicol said in a statement.
“Our focus now is on understanding the policy fully and working carefully … to ensure any next steps are approached with clear understanding, respect and care.
“This is a complex and sensitive area that directly affects people, not just policy. We are committed to showing Manaaki (care) by supporting athletes’ wellbeing, privacy and dignity.”
The IOC’s working group, whose research underpinned the policy, found scientific evidence pointed to a male performance advantage in all sports and of more than 100% in events that involve explosive power such as weightlifting.
Further, they found no “current evidence that testosterone suppression or gender-affirming hormone treatment eliminates this advantage”.
Opponents of the policy dispute the science, have concerns around the mental health of transgender athletes as well as safeguarding and the impact on athletes who discover they have a DSD only after taking the SRY test.
Australian LGBT sports rights group Pride Cup on Friday called on the country’s national sports federations, many of which are committed to inclusion for gender-diverse athletes, to reject the new policy.
“(It shifts) the focus of women’s sport to exclusion by proposing genetic testing and stricter eligibility rules that do nothing to improve conditions for women in sport,” it said in a statement.
The Australian Olympic Committee, however, acknowledged the new policy and the “fairness and certainty” it gave to elite female athletes. “This decision will be challenging for some athletes and (we) are mindful of their welfare and wellbeing,” said AOC President Ian Chesterman. “We also acknowledge this decision does not apply to any grassroots or recreational sports programmes.”
The French Olympic Committee said on Thursday that it had “major ethical and scientific concerns for all those affected” and that the SRY tests would be illegal in France under the nation’s strict bioethics law on genetic testing.
French athletes faced challenges conforming to similar requirements put in place by World Athletics ahead of last year’s World Championships but were able to undertake the cheek-swab test outside France. The IOC did not foresee a major problem with the legality issue.
“Based on (International Federation) experience, genetic screening for sex does not create significant problems in practice,” the policy document read.
“It is legal in most countries, and athletes from the countries where it is not permitted can lawfully be tested elsewhere.”
(With inputs from Reuters)
