In more than two decades as IOC president, Samaranch, 80, has transformed what was an amateur enterprise on and off the field into a billion-dollar juggernaut showcasing the world’s finest pro athletes and backed by the world’s largest corporations. His legacy, however, has been tarnished by the Salt Lake City bribery scandal, which, without implicating him directly, revealed corruption at the heart of the IOC process that awarded the Games. Under fire, Samaranch and his allies booted 10 IOC delegates and instituted procedural reforms aimed at restoring faith in Olympic virtue. “Salt Lake City was a rude awakening, but we made the changes that enabled us to climb back from crisis,” says Dick Pound, a Canadian attorney and one of five presidential hopefuls. “Now we have to demonstrate to our sponsors that we can stay the course and that we stand for the same values they do.”
The “values” of Olympic sponsors such as Coke and Visa are simple: they don’t like to be embarrassed. That’s why the presidential vote matters to them. The election was expected to come down to two of Samaranch’s most trusted associates, Pound and Jacques Rogge, a Belgian orthopedic surgeon. A victory for either would be viewed as an endorsement of the reforms. But to the chagrin of many of the delegates from Europe and North America–and the Western corporations that bankrolled Samaranch’s empire–South Korea’s Kim Un-Yung has emerged as a prime contender for the top job. Kim, who heads two international athletic federations, was the most prominent Olympic leader implicated in the Salt Lake City scandal. He was censured by the IOC after Salt Lake’s bid committee awarded a no-show job to his son, John, who was later indicted on federal charges including immigration fraud. (Both have denied any wrongdoing.) The elder Kim travels in the States on a diplomatic passport, enabling him to avoid any investigatory subpoenas. “If the U.S. government wants to interview me, they can do so any time, in Seoul or elsewhere,” he says. “Even after two years of investigating, they haven’t found anything on me.”
Kim’s candidacy has capitalized on his generous support of Third World athletic programs. He is also the beneficiary of a backlash against the United States, which, in the view of more than a few IOC delegates, was responsible for the scandal, then used its financial clout to force unwelcome changes. As the centerpiece of his campaign, Kim has pledged to reverse a ban on member visits to cities bidding to host the Games, thus reinstituting a treasured perk. “The IOC has undergone a revolution,” Kim told NEWSWEEK. “We now have to stabilize it. Talking about whether or not to take a $200 souvenir is not reform.”
But it is that kind of talk that makes sponsors with millions invested in the Olympic image so skittish. “The Olympics needs someone above reproach,” says David D’Alessandro, chairman and CEO of the big-bucks Olympic sponsor John Hancock Financial Services and an outspoken IOC critic in the past. “Kim’s platform sounds like a return to the days of nepotism and insularity, and that would be an embarrassment.” But the IOC, whose members are sometimes disparaged as the Lords of the Rings, can be remarkably obtuse about public sentiment. Kim appears well-positioned to compete for the presidency or, at the least, to broker an election that for the first time may not be dictated by the Western powers. Those who have bemoaned the domination of the Olympics by rich corporations may soon have something else to worry about.
