After the sport's international court of arbitration, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas), decided to open for Russian teams in championships organized by the International Ice Hockey Federation (IIHF), the board of the Swedish Ice Hockey Association has chosen a difficult line. Sweden will participate in the tournaments, but not play against Russia. This could mean that Tre Kronor leaves walkover even in a decisive match for the WC gold.
The IIHF has also announced that the organization will follow the Cas decision. Russia's sports minister believes that any canceled World Cup matches should be counted as Russian victories and that material on the planned boycotts will be submitted to the International Olympic Committee (IOC). Thus, the IIHF may have to decide on sanctions for the national associations that refuse to play against Russia.
The Swedish Ice Hockey Federation's chairman Anders Larsson is a member of the IIHF Council, the international federation's executive body. He is also vice chairman of the Swedish Olympic Committee (SOK). He thus has leading assignments at three levels: in the national ice hockey association, in the international ice hockey association and within the Swedish Olympic movement.
As a member of the IIHF Council, Larsson participates in the management of a Russian participation. As chairman of the Swedish confederation, Larsson has also led the board that decided that the national team should not play against Russia. He thus has a role both in the IIHF's continued management and in the Swedish confederation, which has chosen a different line. It's a difficult position because the missions can involve different loyalties. If the interests of the IIHF and Swedish ice hockey differ, who does he represent?
Swedish sports have already seen how such a role conflict can become unsustainable. During 2023, Karl-Erik Nilsson was chairman of the Swedish Sports Confederation and at the same time first vice chairman of the European football association Uefa. When Uefa dealt with the issue of the participation of Russian youth teams, he was expected to take responsibility for the international body's actions - and at the same time represent the Swedish sports movement.
Uefa's decision to allow Russian youth teams ran counter to the Swedish stance, and Nilsson shortly afterwards left the post as chairman of the National Sports Confederation after widespread criticism.
Which association and which members' interests should a member put first when the assignments pull in different directions?
However, the phenomenon of sitting on several chairs is not limited to ice hockey and football. As an example, it can be mentioned that Sofia Domeij is simultaneously a member of the National Sports Board, chairman of the Swedish Biathlon Union and vice-chairman of the International Biathlon Union. Maria Krafft Helgesson sits on the National Sports Board and is also acting chairman of the Swedish Skiing Association. Fredrik Rapp is both chairman of the Swedish Handball Association and a member of the SOK's board. Petra Sörling combines the positions of vice president of the SOK, IOC member and president of the International Table Tennis Federation.
The combinations show that Swedish sports has developed a system where people return to several leading sports bodies. When the same people participate in decisions at several levels, the risk of loyalty conflicts, conflict situations and confusion of the organizations' interests increases. In addition, new perspectives become more difficult to reach and the possibility of independent review and accountability is weakened.
This development is difficult to reconcile with the National Sports Confederation's own recommendations on good democratic governance. It emphasizes that a board must be independent and that each member must act independently and with integrity for the interests of the association and the members. But which association and which members' interests should a member put first when the assignments pull in different directions?
Against this background, the National Sports Meeting in 2027 should introduce new provisions in the RF's statutes that prevent conflicting missions and distribute power between more people. A member of the National Sports Board should therefore not simultaneously sit on the board of a special sports association or district association. A member of a specialist sports association should not simultaneously sit on the same association's district board, on the SOK's board or on the IOC's executive committee. And a national association chairman should not simultaneously sit in the international body that governs his own sport.
It is possible to make use of knowledge without having to sit on double chairs. Assignments can advantageously be distributed among several people who are co-opted or report between the organizations. It gives more people important experience and enables a board to independently review the results and demand accountability for decisions made in an affiliated organization.
A national association chairman should not simultaneously sit on the international body that governs his own sport
However, not all dual missions are inappropriate. A member of the National Sports Board should, for example, be able to be a member of a local sports association and thereby gain knowledge of the associations' everyday life. The limit for what is permitted should be drawn when a person has leading assignments in organizations that make decisions that directly affect each other.
The infected Russia issue shows why prohibition of conflicting missions is needed when national and international interests pull in different directions. No leader should have to be squeezed between the shields and no member should have to wonder which mission weighs the most. Experience must be used, but power must be shared by more. In this way, the sports movement avoids dual loyalties.
