Athletes Seeking Asylum: Calls for Reform to Protect Players from Political Risks

In March 2026, members of Iran’s women’s national football team sought asylum in Australia following their participation in the AFC Women’s Asian Cup.[1] Several players initially declined to return to Iran, citing fears of persecution linked to their conduct during official matches, including the refusal to sing the Iranian national anthem.[2] The ensuing events raised a pertinent question for the world of sport and beyond: can international governing bodies maintain claims of neutrality where athletes face risks of State retaliation against political dissidence?

The Factual and Legal Context

On 9 March 2026, the Australian government granted humanitarian visas to several Iranian players, following concerns that they were under surveillance by Iranian officials during the tournament and that reprisals could follow their return.[3]

Under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), non-Australian citizens may apply for a Protection Visa where they meet the definition of a ‘refugee’ under the act or otherwise engage Australia’s complementary protection obligations. [4] These obligations derive from the United Nations 1951 Refugee Convention, as incorporated into domestic law, and require a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons including political opinion.[5] In urgent or politically sensitive cases, the Minister for Immigration retains non-compellable, personal powers under the Act to grant visas in the public interest.[6] While the precise basis for the March 2026 grants has not been publicly detailed, some suggest that executive discretion, motivated by public calls for intervention, played a pivotal role, evidenced by the speed of processes and the coordinated involvement of government authorities.

In the days following the first protection grants, additional players and staffers of the team sought asylum, while others ultimately withdrew their claims and returned to Iran.[7] By mid-April 2026, just two of the seven total team members that initially sought asylum remained in Australia under protection and have since integrated into local football environments.[8]

A Lack of Integrated Regulatory Frameworks Leaving Athletes at Risk 

Participation in tournaments sanctioned by governing bodies such as FIFA and regional confederations places athletes within systems of regulation governing eligibility, discipline, and conduct. Where conduct during competition attracts adverse attention from state authorities, the connection between participation in sport and subsequent risk becomes legally relevant. In this context, exposure to harm is not merely incidental but arises in connection with regulated sporting activity. While FIFA has formally committed to respecting internationally recognised human rights, including through Article 3 of its Statutes and its Human Rights Policy, these commitments have been most clearly developed in relation to tournament hosting and labour conditions, rather than the protection of individual athletes.[9] This raises questions as to whether governing bodies, in exercising control over participation and competition, assume responsibilities extending beyond the organisation of sport to include consideration of prospective risks faced by athletes.

Further questions arise as to how such obligations might operate in practice. An overly prescriptive approach, such as barring athletes’ participation based on anticipated political risk, would produce its own form of unfairness, effectively penalising individuals for the mere possibility of political demonstration. For this reason, it has been suggested that protection is more appropriately addressed through domestic legal frameworks, particularly through the exercise of executive discretion in asylum and humanitarian visa processes. However, reliance on such mechanisms is not without its own difficulties. This situates protection within the ever-changing policies of host states, exposing athletes to the political priorities of the jurisdictions in which they happen to compete, rather than providing consistent safeguards within the structures of international sport itself.

While positive developments warrant recognition, much work remains to safeguard athletes on the international stage. Effective reform will require a more proactive, coordinated approach, emphasising shared responsibility between domestic governments and sporting regulatory bodies. Crucially, the interests of athletes themselves must remain paramount. Meaningful engagement with players and staffers, many of whom face profoundly difficult decisions, is central to a compassionate and effective framework. 

Is Neutrality Enough?

International sporting bodies have traditionally maintained a position of political neutrality, reflected in rules restricting political expression and external interference. This position is justified on the basis of preserving competitive integrity and ensuring broad participation across jurisdictions.[10]

However, neutrality does not operate in a vacuum. States retain the capacity to regulate, monitor, and sanction athletes, particularly where conduct is perceived as politically significant. In circumstances where participation in sport may heighten exposure to state action, a strict adherence to neutrality may have the effect of leaving athletes without institutional protection.[11]

The case of Iran’s women’s national team illustrates the limitations of this approach. While governing bodies abstained from intervention, other actors, including national governments and player associations, recognised and responded to the risks involved through legal mechanisms such as refugee protection. This absence of foresight and a structured response from sporting authorities highlights a misalignment between regulatory power and protective responsibility. 

Recurring Patterns of Risk

The issues raised are not confined to a single incident. In Bahrain, footballer Hakeem al-Araibi was detained and faced extradition proceedings after engaging in political expression, notwithstanding his status as a recognised refugee, highlighting the vulnerability of athletes whose sporting visibility intersects with state authority.[12] Iranian wrestler Saleh Mohammadi was executed in March 2026 following protest-related charges despite international advocacy from sporting organisations and human rights groups.[13]

Conclusion

Ongoing controversy surrounding the Iranian women’s national team exemplifies the increasing difficulty of maintaining a strict separation between sport and the political context its played in. Where participation in international competition exposes athletes to risks of state persecution, the position of neutrality adopted by governing bodies warrants closer scrutiny, and a ‘one size fits all’ approach remains blatantly insufficient. 

Responsibility for athlete protection currently occupies an uneasy limbo between international sport and domestic immigration law. While governing bodies regulate participation, it is ultimately the executive branches of host states that determine whether protection is granted. This produces inconsistent outcomes and places significant weight on discretionary decision-making, leaving the safety of athletes contingent upon further political tensions rather than coherent standards within the very sporting bodies designed to protect them.

References

[1] Reuters, “Iranian women's soccer team arrive back in Iran after some withdrew asylum claim,” 18 March 2026, https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iranian-womens-soccer-team-arrive-back-iran-after-some-withdrew-asylum-claim-2026-03-18/.

[2] Ibid.

[3] SBS News, ‘“Basically Prisoners”: Iranian Players under Heavy Surveillance in Gold Coast Hotel’ (10 March 2026) https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/basically-prisoners-iranian-players-under-heavy-surveillance-in-gold-coast-hotel/9boo8y516

[4] Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 35–36.

[5] UNHCR, ‘The 1951 Refugee Convention’ https://www.unhcr.org/about-unhcr/overview/1951-refugee-convention

[6] See Migration Act 1958 (Cth) s 195A.

[7] Reuters, ‘Fifth Member of Iranian Women’s Soccer Team Withdraws Australia Asylum Offer’ (15 March 2026) https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/fifth-member-iranian-womens-soccer-team-withdraws-australia-asylum-offer-2026-03-15/.

[8] Australian Broadcasting Corporation, ‘Iran Footballers Who Sought Asylum in Australia “Overwhelmed” by Support’ (17 April 2026) https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-04-17/iran-footballers-who-sought-asylum-australia-overwhlemed-support/106574862

[9] Australian Broadcasting Corporation, ‘FIFA, AFC Accused of Failing Their Human Rights Obligations after Iran Women’s Asian Cup Asylum Saga’ (13 March 2026) https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-03-13/fifa-human-rights-responsibility-iran-womens-asian-cup-asylum/106437804

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] BBC News, ‘Hakeem al-Araibi: Thailand Frees Refugee Footballer’ (11 February 2019) https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-47196696.

[13] British Broadcasting Corporation, ‘Iran Executes Teenage Wrestler over Protest Killing’ (Web Page, 19 March 2026) https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce9mzn7k722o