Technicalities

Content warning for discussion of sexual assault.

Nikolaj Sorensen’s 6 year suspension for sexual maltreatment was overturned today by the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada. Sorensen, a former senior level ice dancer, was accused in January 2024 of sexual assault that happened in 2012. Canada’s Office of the Sport Integrity Commission (OSIC) reviewed the allegations and imposed a 6 year suspension on Sorensen starting in October 2024. That investigation happened in Canada because Sorensen represented Canada at the time he was accused, though not when the alleged assault occurred. His suspension was overturned today by the SDRCC. The reversal was on procedural grounds, which is to say that SDRCC found a fault in the investigation and its remit. As of today, Sorensen is eligible to compete and coach.

Sorensen’s case demonstrates how complex and difficult it is to adequately investigate abuse allegations in figure skating. Figure skaters will regularly move to train outside their home country, switch national affiliations, and work with international teams of coaches, choreographers, and assorted support staff. The global mobility of athletes and coaches enriches figure skating in many ways, but a side effect is that it creates a thicket of competing rules and governing bodies. Those thickets are where cases of abuse, neglect, and incompetence can flourish. It’s very difficult to impose consistent standards of proof, judgment, and redress for abuse across the sport.

That difficultly leads us to the present situation with Sorensen. Sorensen is now allowed to coach and compete because the SDRCC ruled that he couldn’t be retroactively held to account for a code of conduct signed after the alleged assault occurred. That code of conduct didn’t exist in 2012 and is specific to athletes representing Canada. Yes, that’s a mouthful. Yes, I can understand in abstract why this kind of clause exists: it isn’t always fair or reasonable to impose a contemporary standard of judgement or conduct on historical actions. But even as I’m typing this out to understand the logic I’m railing against how bloody torturous it is. It sounds like, “Hey, we’re going to ask you to sign this paper saying you agree to Not Do Terrible Shit, but any Terrible Shit that happens before that? Not our jurisdiction.” That distinction is why this ruling is especially frustrating.

Whether or not an athlete enjoys a safe, happy, and successful career largely depends on the people in their orbit. Those people must be motivated to protect the health and safety of their most vulnerable athletes first. “He’s an ass but he’s got great knees,” was used to excuse the behaviour of a particularly gross male ice dancer at a club I would visit for extra ice back in the day. What a thing for a 16 year old girl to hear from an adult who is supposed to be in charge. That’s utter crap. “He’s an ass and he’s not welcome in our rink,” should be the response. It was certainly the response of my coach, who immediately found me a different partner and clapped back at the club once I told her what was happening. I was lucky, I guess, that I only needed partnering for testing and I did not have a competitive future at stake with this guy. I also had a great relationship with my coach and knew she had my back. Not every skater can say the same. While we push for figure skating’s governing bodies to catch up with what needs to be done for global regulation, those inside the sport must be vocal and persistent about what behaviour we defend and value.

You can find Christine Brennan’s original reporting on the allegations here, reporting on Sorensen’s suspension here, and an overview of the reversal here.