Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Sports

Disqualification of Heraskevych: EU ambassador outraged — appeal and diplomatic fallout

The IOC suspended a Ukrainian skeleton racer over a "helmet of remembrance." The EU ambassador in Kyiv called the decision unfair, and Ukraine is preparing an appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) — the incident has become a test of the Olympics' rules on neutrality and the freedom to commemorate.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

February 12, 2026 · 2 min read

Disqualification of Heraskevych: EU ambassador outraged — appeal and diplomatic fallout

What happened

The European Union's Ambassador to Ukraine, Katarina Maternova, expressed outrage over the disqualification of Ukrainian skeleton racer Vladyslav Heraskevych. According to UNN, Maternova wrote on the social network X that the athlete was removed from the competition after he intended to start in a "helmet of remembrance" — as a sign of respect for fallen Ukrainian athletes and soldiers. Meanwhile, about 20 Russians and Belarusians are currently participating in the competitions in a neutral status.

"I am outraged. Skeleton racer Heraskevych was excluded after honoring fallen athletes, while 20 Russians and Belarusians compete as neutrals. The Olympic Games should symbolize unity and support, not punish someone for remembering"

— Katarina Maternova, EU Ambassador to Ukraine

Reaction and steps by the Ukrainian side

Heraskevych himself told reporters that he will file an appeal with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha condemned the IOC's decision, calling it a "shameful moment" and a "betrayal of the Olympic Code" — a stance that shifts the incident from a purely sporting matter into the diplomatic sphere.

Wider context: equipment, rules and double standards

This case is not isolated: earlier international bodies banned Ukrainian athletes from using their own equipment — freestyler Kateryna Kotsar and other athletes have been mentioned. Restrictions on equipment in short track have also been reported. For many experts and sports rights advocates, this signals that the application of rules regarding political or symbolic expressions is selective.

From the perspective of international law and precedent, the outcome of the appeal to the CAS is important not only for a single athlete: the decision could define the limits of permissible commemoration at future competitions and affect how sports organizations balance the principle of neutrality with the right to express remembrance.

What’s next

The situation creates dual pressure: legal — through the appeal to the CAS, and diplomatic — through statements by the EU ambassador and Ukrainian ministers. The question for the Olympic organizers and international federations is simple and at the same time complex: how to guarantee neutrality without depriving athletes of the opportunity to honor the deceased, when that gesture contains no calls to violence or political propaganda?

Analysts note that the IOC's and related organizations' response will affect not only the reputation of the Olympics as a platform of unity, but also the practical rules that will determine the boundaries of athletes' expression of civic and moral positions in the future.

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