Algeria’s Imane Khelif beats Yang Liu to win boxing gold at Paris Olympics
Paris (AP): Algerian boxer Imane Khelif has won a gold medal Friday at the Paris Olympics, emerging a champion from a tumultuous run at the Games where she endured intense scrutiny in the ring and online abuse from around the world over misconceptions about her womanhood.
Khelif beat Yang Liu of China 5:0 in the final of the women's welterweight division, wrapping up the best series of fights of her boxing career with a victory at Roland Garros, where crowds chanted her name, waved Algerian flags and roared every time she landed a punch.
After her unanimous win, Khelif jumped into her coaches' arms, one of them putting her on his shoulders and carrying her in a victory lap as she pumped her fists and grabbed an Algerian flag from the crowd.
“For eight years, this has been my dream, and I'm now the Olympic champion and gold medalist,” Khelif said through an interpreter. Asked about the scrutiny, she told reporters: “That also gives my success a special taste because of those attacks.”
“We are in the Olympics to perform as athletes, and I hope that we will not see any similar attacks in future Olympics,” she said.
Fans have embraced Khelif in Paris even as she faced an extraordinary amount of scrutiny from world leaders, major celebrities and others who have questioned her eligibility or falsely claimed she was a man. It has thrust her into a larger divide over changing attitudes toward gender identity and regulations in sports.
It stems from the Russian-dominated International Boxing Association's decision to disqualify Khelif and fellow two-time Olympian Li Yu-ting of Taiwan from last year's world championships, claiming both failed an eligibility test for women's competition that IBA officials have declined to answer basic questions about.
“I'm fully qualified to take part in this competition,” Khelif said Friday. “I'm a woman like any other woman. I was born as a woman, I live as a woman, and I am qualified."
The International Olympic Committee took the unprecedented step last year of permanently banning the IBA from the Olympics following years of concerns about its governance, competitive fairness and financial transparency. The IOC has called the arbitrary sex tests that the sport's governing body imposed on the two boxers irretrievably flawed.
The IOC has repeatedly reaffirmed the two boxers' right to compete in Paris, with President Thomas Bach personally defending Khelif and Lin while calling the criticism “hate speech.”
Khelif noted that she has boxed in IBA competitions since 2018 but now “they hate me, and I don't know why."
"I sent them a single message with this gold medal, and that is that my dignity and honor are above all else,” she said.
The IBA's reputation hasn't stopped the international outcry tied to misconceptions around the fighters, which has been amplified by Russian disinformation networks. It also hasn't slowed two boxers who have performed at the highest levels of their careers while under the spotlight's glare.
Khelif was dominant in Paris at a level she had never reached before: She won every round on every judge's scorecard in each of her three fights that went the distance.
Khelif's gold medal is Algeria's first in women's boxing. She is only the nation's second boxing gold medalist, joining Hocine Soltani (1996) while claiming the seventh gold medal in Algeria's Olympic history.
While Khelif drew enthusiastic, flag-draped fans in Paris, she also has become a hero in her North African country, where many have seen the world's dissection of Khelif as criticism of their nation.
Dubbed “The Night of Destiny” in local newspapers, Khelif's fight was projected on screens set up in public squares throughout Algiers and other cities. In the city of Tiaret in the region where Khelif is from, workers braved scorching summer heat to paint a mural of Khelif on the gym where she learned to box.
“Imane has managed to turn the criticism and attacks on her femininity into fuel,” said Mustapha Bensaou of the Tiaret gym. “The slander has given her a boost. ... It's a bit of a blessing in disguise.”
Khelif won the first round over Yang on all five judges' cards despite showing a bit less aggression than earlier in the tournament. Khelif then knocked Yang back against the ropes with a combination early in the second, although Yang responded with a flurry of shots and fought gamely.
Khelif won the second round and cruised through the third, doing a triumphant boxer's shuffle in the final seconds of the bout before the boxers hugged. When the verdict was announced, Khelif saluted and pumped her arm with glee.
During the medal ceremony, she grinned and waved to the crowd before kissing her gold medal. The four medalists — boxing gives out two bronze — then posed for a podium selfie, clasped hands and raised them together.
The gold medal fight was the culmination of Khelif's nine-day run through an Olympic tournament that began bizarrely. Khelif's first opponent, Angela Carini of Italy, abandoned their bout after just 46 seconds, saying she was in too much pain from Khelif's punches.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Deep societal faultlines persist despite 75 years of independence: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Judge cites denial of home to Muslim girl, opposition to Dalit women cooking mid-day meals
Hyderabad, February 23, 2026: Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has said that despite repeated affirmations of constitutional morality by courts, deep societal faultlines rooted in caste and religious discrimination continue to shape everyday realities in India.
Speaking at a seminar on “Constitutional Morality and the Role of District Judiciary” organised by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy in Hyderabad, Justice Bhuyan reflected on the gap between constitutional ideals and social practices.
He cited a recent instance involving his daughter’s friend, a PhD scholar at a private university in Noida, who was denied accommodation in South Delhi after her surname revealed her Muslim identity. According to Justice Bhuyan, the landlady bluntly informed her that no accommodation was available once her religious background became known.
In another example from Odisha, he referred to resistance by some parents to the government’s mid-day meal programme because the food was prepared by Dalit women employed as cooks. He noted that some parents had objected aggressively and refused to allow their children to consume meals cooked by members of the Scheduled Caste community.
Describing these incidents as “the tip of the iceberg,” Justice Bhuyan said they reveal how far society remains from the benchmark of constitutional morality even 75 years into the Republic. He observed that while the Constitution lays down standards of equality and dignity, the morality practised within homes and communities often diverges sharply from those values.
He emphasised that constitutional morality requires governance through the rule of law rather than the rule of popular opinion. Referring to the evolution of the doctrine through judicial decisions, he cited Naz Foundation v Union of India, in which the Delhi High Court read down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that popular morality cannot restrict fundamental rights under Article 21. Though the judgment was later overturned in Suresh Kumar Koushal v Naz Foundation, the Supreme Court ultimately restored and expanded the principle in Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India, affirming that constitutional morality must prevail over majoritarian views.
“In our constitutional scheme, it is the constitutionality of the issue before the court that is relevant, not the dominant or popular view,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also addressed the functioning of the district judiciary, underlining that trial courts are the first point of contact for most litigants and form the foundation of the justice delivery system. He stressed that due importance must be given to the recording of evidence and adjudication of bail matters.
Highlighting the role of High Courts, he said their supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is intended as a shield to correct grave jurisdictional errors, not as a mechanism to substitute the discretion or factual appreciation of trial judges.
He recalled that several distinguished judges, including Justice H R Khanna, Justice A M Ahmadi, and Justice Fathima Beevi, began their careers in the district judiciary.
On representation within the judicial system, Justice Bhuyan noted that Telangana has made significant strides in gender inclusion. Out of a sanctioned strength of 655 judicial officers in the Telangana Judicial Service, 478 are currently serving, of whom 283 are women, exceeding 50 per cent representation. He added that members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, minority communities, and persons with disabilities are also represented in the state’s judiciary.
He observed that greater representation of women, marginalised communities, persons with disabilities, and sexual minorities would help make the judiciary more inclusive and reflective of India’s diversity. “The judiciary must represent all the colours of the rainbow and become a rainbow institution,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also referred to the recent restoration by the Supreme Court of the requirement of a minimum three years of practice at the Bar for entry-level judicial posts. While acknowledging that the requirement ensures practical exposure, he cautioned that its impact on women aspirants, especially those from rural or small-town backgrounds facing social and financial constraints, would need to be carefully observed over time.
Concluding his address, he reiterated that the justice system must strive to bridge the gap between constitutional ideals and lived realities, ensuring that the rule of law remains paramount.
