Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

An award in response: Zelensky awarded Heraskevych the Order of Liberty after IOC disqualification

The President honored the skeleton racer for the "helmet of memory" — it was not only an act of support for the athlete but a clear signal about the values Ukraine brings to the international arena.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

February 12, 2026 · 2 min read

An award in response: Zelensky awarded Heraskevych the Order of Liberty after IOC disqualification
Владислав Гераскевич (Фото: Facebook-акаунт спортсмена)

What happened

On 12 February 2026, by Presidential Decree No. 119/2026, Volodymyr Zelensky awarded Vladyslav Heraskevych the Order of Liberty. The decision appeared on the Office of the President’s website as a reaction to the athlete’s disqualification from the Olympic Games for wearing the so-called “memory helmet.”

Brief chronology

On 9 February Heraskevych reported that one of the IOC representatives had banned him from using a helmet bearing portraits of deceased Ukrainian athletes. The NOC of Ukraine appealed to the IOC asking to allow him to compete in that helmet. On 10 February the IOC allowed the use of a black band instead of the helmet, but on 12 February it decided on disqualification, explaining that the helmet “did not comply with the rules.”

Why it matters

The award is not only an act of solidarity with a single athlete. It sends a two-level signal: internally — support for national memory and morale during the war; externally — a challenge to international institutions over how Olympic rules are interpreted in the context of aggression against Ukraine.

In his statement Zelensky directly linked the issue to violations of international norms in past years and set out the factual scope of the conflict: during the years of the full-scale war 660 Ukrainian athletes and coaches have been killed, while 13 Russians are participating in the Games in Italy “under neutral flags.”

“Sport does not mean impunity, and the Olympic movement must help stop wars, not play into the hands of the aggressor.”

— Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine

“I thank our athlete for his clear stance. His helmet with portraits of fallen Ukrainian athletes — it is about honor and remembrance.”

— Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine

Context and possible consequences

Zelensky’s decision works for several audiences at once: for Ukrainian society it is a powerful symbol of support; for the IOC and the international community it is diplomatic and media pressure. The NOC of Ukraine has already appealed to the IOC; the state head’s award strengthens that appeal both politically and symbolically.

Analytically: the conflict around a single athlete highlights a broader question — how international sports institutions will balance formal rules with moral demands that arise during wartime. For Ukraine this is a test of how ready global organizations are to take the context of aggression into account when enforcing rules.

Conclusion

Heraskevych’s award is more than a personal honor. It is a public challenge and an invitation to discussion: can sports rules be neutral when lives and memory are at stake? The ball is now in the international institutions’ court — will they hear the message, or reduce the matter to a purely technical decision.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026