Leading Article: Samaranch must resign to preserve the Olympic ideal

ONCE UPON a time there was an ageing dictator who had ruled his corrupt and secretive domain for 15 years. He was 75, which was the compulsory age of retirement for members of the ruling body. Fortunately, the ruling body raised the limit to 80. Then it passed a resolution two years later begging the President to stand for another four-year term.

However, this was no South American banana republic way back when. This was the International Olympic Committee last year. So much for the so- called "Olympic ideal". Juan Antonio Samaranch was re-elected and could carry on as President until 2001, when he will be 81. "The decision was not difficult," he said. "It is not a sacrifice being at the head of the Olympic movement."

Far from it, it would seem, from the latest revelations of Olympic bribery. Mr Samaranch is not yet ready to fall on the samurai sword given him by the city of Nagano, which staged the 1998 Winter Olympics. But at last there are signs that some of the dissident members of the IOC are ready to give him a push. They deserve the strongest possible support in their showdown with Mr Samaranch, which begins with the publication tomorrow of a report into the corruption of Salt Lake City's bid for the 2002 Winter Games.

It has been obvious for some time that Mr Samaranch's resignation is the precondition of saving the reputation of the Olympic movement. Not because he accepted the samurai sword and, from Salt Lake City, a shotgun and rifle - arguing that, as a non-voting member of the IOC, he was exempt from the pounds 100 limit on gifts. And not simply because of the wider bribery and corruption that was well known but, until now, difficult to prove. He should have resigned last year for undermining the drive against doping in sport by appearing to suggest that small amounts of drugs which did no harm should be allowed.

But merely sending the old dictator into retirement is not enough. The IOC needs thoroughgoing reform. No one would be so naive as to imagine that huge sporting events can be awarded to rich and rivalrous cities around the world without unseemly horse-trading, politicking and arm- twisting. After the 1976 Games bankrupted Montreal, and the 1980 Games were boycotted in Moscow, Los Angeles made a $200m profit from the 1984 Games, and the Olympics now means big money. It is the same with the World Cup and, in America, the Super Bowl.

What matters, though, is that the IOC operates openly and democratically under agreed rules. Richard Pound, the Canadian IOC vice-president who has exposed the Salt Lake City bribes, has made sensible proposals for new rules to govern lobbying and he has talked of rooting out the bad apples on the IOC as a first step, while being respectful of the President himself. Well, Mr Pound should drop the politeness: the first apple out should be Mr Samaranch, Mr Pound should take over, and the whole IOC should be reconstituted. It should cease to be a self-selecting oligarchy, and its members should be elected by and accountable to the sporting bodies in the country they represent.

The torch of true amateurism may have been extinguished, but the flame of probity can still be kept alight.