This chapter compares the European Union (EU) and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) regarding their sanctioning practices in response to international conflicts and human rights abuses. The EU, a supranational organisation with binding legal authority, contrasts with private-law-based sports bodies like the IOC that exercise “state-like” regulatory power without direct democratic accountability. However, both govern transnational activities and impose sanctions with significant political and economic impact. Despite differences, they face similar legitimacy challenges, including accusations of double standards in sanctioning conflicts, most notably contrasting responses to Russia’s actions in Ukraine, widely characterised as aggression, and Israel’s military actions in Gaza. The chapter explores their respective sanctioning instruments and standards of review, highlighting the EU’s political discretion versus the IOC’s emerging legal scrutiny via the Court of Arbitration for Sport. It also examines the common trend toward “targeted” sanctions and underscores the necessity for transparent criteria and robust legal protections to ensure legitimacy in both systems’ approaches to international law and human rights violations.