Sometimes when they interrogated Xie Yang they sat him on top of a stack of plastic stools. And then, between threats to turn him into an “invalid”, they kicked, punched and head-butted him, blew cigarette smoke in his face and suggested that his wife had better take care when driving. “If you move, we can consider that you attacked a police officer, and we can take whatever steps to deal with you,” he was warned.

Xie, a prominent Chinese lawyer who was among around 300 human rights activists detained in July 2015, was also hung from the ceiling and beaten so badly he lost consciousness. “We represent the party centre in handling your case,” one police officer told him, referring to China’s leadership. “Even if we leave you dead, you won’t find any evidence.”

Eventually Xie signed a confession saying he was subverting the Chinese communist party by representing disgruntled citizens and discussing rights cases. He told his legal team: “I wanted to end their interrogation of me as quickly as I could, even if it meant death”.

We know of these allegations because of testimony released by Xie’s lawyers on Thursday, the same day that the International Olympic Committee hailed a lucrative new deal with the Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba, which is likely to swell its coffers by around $1bn over the next 11 years.

Just 24 hours earlier the head of the IOC, Thomas Bach, had enjoyed the warmest of meetings with China’s president, Xi Jinping. “China and the IOC enjoy excellent relations and strong cooperation on many different levels” claimed Bach.

Xi’s response was frothy even by the standards of these occasions. “We have many dreams,” he replied. “[Including] the dream of promoting the Olympic movement; and fostering a community of shared destiny for the whole of humanity – I believe the IOC has a huge role to play to help.”

Someone – Bach himself, perhaps? – should have directed Xi to the Olympic Charter, which sets out the fundamental principles of the Olympic movement. Its first principle stresses “respect for universal ethical principles”. The second the “preservation of human dignity”. Then there’s the sixth principle, which reaffirms the importance of “rights and freedoms – without discrimination of any kind” including “political or other opinion”.

We have already seen the consequences of the IOC turning to non-democratic nations

And maybe someone at the IOC should have questioned how closely China lives up to those standards. Perhaps by talking to Xie, although that would be difficult given he is languishing in a prison cell awaiting trial. Or another human rights lawyer, Li Chunfu, who after being kept in prison for 500 days, was released last week on bail in a “confused and frightened condition, occasionally raving or belligerent” having been tortured and administered with unknown drugs.

But no. Deals need to be struck. Money made. Handshakes exchanged. True, the agreement was between the IOC and Alibaba. But as professor Simon Chadwick, a China expert at the University of Salford, points out there is often a close relationship between the Chinese government and business when it comes to sport. “It is not as if the president gets business people in the room and says: ‘Right boys, this is what we are going to do,’” he says. “It is not so overt or explicit. But if you want to curry favour with the state, you need to be seen publicly to be supporting what the state is trying to do.”

It was the latest in the growing list of IOC behaviours that appear to violate its own principles. We have already seen the consequences of it increasingly turning to non-democratic nations to host its showpiece events, with the revelations of widespread state-sponsored doping at the Sochi Winter Olympics in 2014. It hardly covered itself in glory with its desperate contortions to allow the majority of Russian athletes to compete in Rio either.

And, as Amnesty International has pointed out, the IOC also failed to include an explicit requirement to respect and protect human rights in the contract for the host city of the 2024 Olympics. So much for that charter, eh?

Meanwhile China continues to power on, determined to exert more influence on the global sporting stage. It can hardly be blamed for that. But anyone striking deals with China – whether it is the British government pledging £3m to help Chinese children play football in 2015, Wolves fans welcoming Chinese ownership, or organisations such as the IOC and Fifa – should pause to consider the consequences of what Chadwick sees as “the unquestioning rush for Chinese money”.

Last week the Chinese news agency Xinhua reported that Bach had told President Xi he wanted to “help the Chinese people realise their dreams”.

Meanwhile Xie is still battling his nightmare. His lawyers have asked prosecutors to examine his claims of torture, listing the names of 10 police officers they say should answer the accusations. “I tell you now that my spirit is free,” he told his lawyers. “I declare that I, Xie Yang, am innocent.”

Can Bach look himself in the eye and say the same thing?