Caster Semenya’s legal saga against World Athletics centred on the alleged illegality of the organization’s Differences in Sex Development (DSD) Regulations. These rules imposed a blanket ban on athletes with testosterone levels exceeding prescribed thresholds from participating in women’s competitions unless they artificially reduced their testosterone levels through hormonal treatments. Semenya challenged the Regulations before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) as a world-class athlete directly impacted. Following her defeat at CAS, she filed an annulment petition before the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (SFSC). After losing again, Semenya resorted to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which ultimately held Switzerland accountable for violating the athlete’s human rights, including non-discrimination, respect for private life, and the right to an effective remedy. This protracted jurisprudence sparked intense debate across human rights, medical, and sports communities but received limited attention within legal and, notably, arbitration circles. This article contends that the SFSC erred in upholding the CAS award, which should have been annulled on public policy grounds. The author also explores how fundamental human rights violations can be incorporated into the otherwise enigmatic public policy mosaic by critically analysing public policy as a ground for setting aside CAS arbitral awards.