text stringlengths 1 17.8k |
|---|
27 | P a g e Factors to be included in considering whether to Disqualify other results in an Event might include, for example, the seriousness of the Athlete’s anti-doping rule violat ion and whether the Athlete tested negative in the other Competitions. |
[Comment to Article 10.1.1: Whereas Article 9 Disqualifies th e result in a single Competition in which the Athlete tested positive (e.g. |
the 100 metre backstroke), this Article may lead to Disqualification of all results in all matches during the Event (e.g. |
the swimming World Championships).] |
10.1.2 If the Athlete establishes that he or she bears No Fault or Negligence for the violation, the Athlete's individual results in the other Competitions shall not be Disqualified , unless the Athlete's results in Competitions other than the Competition in which the anti -dopin g rule violation occurred were... |
10.2 Ineligibil ity for Presence, Use or Attempted Use , or Possession of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method The period of Ineligibility for a violation of Articles 2.1, 2.2 or 2.6 shall be as follows, subject to potential reduction or suspension pursuant to Articles 10.5, 10.6 or 10.7: 10.2.1 The per... |
[Comment to Article 10.2.1.1: While it is theoretically possible for an Athlete or oth er Person to establish that an anti -doping rule violation was not intentional without showing how the Prohibited Substance entered one’s system, it is highly unlikely that in a doping case under Article 2.1 an Athlete will be succes... |
10.2.1.2 The anti -doping rule violation involves a Specified Substance and the WSF can establish that the anti -doping rule violation was intentional. |
10.2.2 If Article 10.2.1 does not apply, subject to Article 10.2.4.1, the period of Ineligibility shall be two (2) years. |
10.2.3 As used in Article 10.2, the term “intentional” is meant to identify those Athletes or other Persons who engage in conduct which they knew constituted an anti -doping rule violation or knew that there was a significant risk that the conduct might constitute or result in an anti -doping rule violation and mani... |
An anti -doping rul e violation resulting from an Adverse A nalytical Finding for a substance which is only prohibited In-Competition shall be rebuttably presumed to be not “intentional” if the substance is a Specified Substance and the Athlete can establish that the Prohibite d Substance was Used Out-of-Competitio... |
An anti -doping rule violation resulting from an Adverse Analytical Finding for a substance which is only prohibited In-Competition shall not be considered “intentional” if the substance is not a Specified Substance and the Athlete can establish that the Prohibited Substance was Used Out-of-Competition in a contex... |
[Comment to Article 10.2.3: Article 10.2.3. provides a special definition of “intentional” which is to be applied solely fo r purposes of Article 10.2.] |
10.2.4 Notwithstanding any other provision in Article 10.2, where the anti -doping rule violation involves a Substance of Abuse : 10.2.4.1 If the Athlete can establish that any ingestion or Use occurred Out-of-Competition and was unrelated to sport performance, then t he period of Ineligibility shall be three (3)... |
In addition, the period of Ineligibility calculated under this Article 10.2.4.1 may be reduced to one (1) month if the Athlete or other Person satisfactorily completes a Substance of Abus e treatment program approved by the WSF. |
The period of Ineligibility established in this Article 10.2.4.1 is not subject to any reduction based on any provision in Article 10.6. |
[Comment to Article 10.2.4.1: The determinations as to whether the treatment p rogram is approved and whether the Athlete or other Person has satisfactorily completed the program shall be made in the sole discretion of the WSF. |
This Article is intended to give the WSF the leeway to apply their own judgement to identify and approve le gitimate and reputable, as opposed to “sham”, treatment programs. |
It is anticipated, however, that the characteristics of legitimate treatment programs may 28 | P a g e vary widely and change over time s uch that it would not be practical for WADA to develop mandatory criteria for acceptable treatment programs.] |
10.2.4.2 If the ingestion, Use or Possession occurred In-Competition , and the Athlete can establish that the context of ingestion, Use or Possessi on was unrelated to sport performance, then the ingestion, Use or Possession shall not be considered intentional for purposes of Article 10.2.1 and shall not provide a ... |
10.3 Ineligibility for Other Anti-Doping Rule Violations The period of Ineligibility for anti -doping rule violations other than as provided in Article 10.2 shall be as follows, unless Articles 10.6 or 10.7 are applicable: 10.3.1 For violations of Article 2.3 o r 2.5, the period of Ineligibility shall be four (... |
10.3.2 For violations of Article 2.4, the period of Ineligibility shall be two (2) years, subjec t to reduction down to a minimum of one (1) year, depending on the Athlete ’s degree of Fault. |
The flexibility between two (2) year s and one (1) year of Ineligibility in this Article is not available to Athletes where a pattern of last -minute whereabouts ch anges or other conduct raises a serious suspicion that the Athlete was trying to avoid being available for Testing . |
10.3.3 For vio lations of Article 2.7 or 2.8, the period of Ineligibility shall be a minimum of four (4) years up to lifetime Ineligibility , depending on the seriousness of the violation. |
An Article 2.7 or Article 2.8 violation involving a Protected Person shall be consi dered a particularly serious violation and, if committed by Athlete Support Personnel for violations other than for Specified Substances , shall result in lifetime Ineligibility for Athlete Support Personnel . |
In addition, significant violations of Article 2 .7 or 2.8 which may also violate non -sporting laws and regulations, shall be reported to the competent administrative, professional or judicial authorities. |
[Comment to Article 10.3.3: Those who are involved in doping Athletes or cove ring up doping should be subject to sanctions which are more severe than the Athletes who test positive. |
Since the authority of sport organisations is generally limited to Ineligibility for accreditation, membership and other sport benefits, reporting Athl ete Support Personnel to competent authorities is an important step in the deterrence of doping.] |
10.3.4 For violations of Article 2.9, the period of Ineligibility imposed shall be a minimum of two (2) years, up to lifetime Ineligibility , depending on the seriousness of the violation. |
10.3.5 For violations of Article 2.10, the period of Ineligibility shall be two (2) years, subject to reduction down to a minimum of one (1) year, depending on the Athlete or other Person ’s degree of Fault and other circumstan ces of the case. |
[Comment to Article 10.3.5: Where the “other Person” referenced in A rticle 2.10 is an entity and not an individual, that entity may be disciplined as provided in Article 12.] |
10.3.6 For violations of Article 2.11, the period of Ineligibili ty shall be a minimum of two (2) years, up to lifetime Ineligibility , depending on th e seriousness of the violation by the Athlete or other Person . |
[Comment to Article 10.3.6: Conduct that is found to violate both Article 2.5 (Tampering) and Article 2.11 ( Acts by an Athlete or Other Person to Discourage or Retaliate Against Reporting to Authorities) shall be sanctioned based on the violation that carries the more severe sanction.] |
10.4 Aggravating Circumstances which may Increase the Period of Ineligibility If the WSF establishes in an individual case involving an anti -doping rule violation other than violations under Articles 2.7 ( Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking ), 2.8 ( Administration or Attempted Administration ), 2.9 ( Complicity ... |
[Comment to Article 10.4: Violations under Articles 2.7 (Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking), 2.8 (Administration or Attempted Administration), 2.9 (Complicity or Attempted Complicity) and 2.11 (Acts by an A thlete or Ot her Person to Discourage or Retaliate Against Reporting) are not included in the application of A... |
10.5 Elimination of the Period of Ineligibility where there is No Fault or Negligence If an Athlete or other Person establishes in an individual case that he or she bears No Fault or Negligence , then the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility shall be eliminated. |
[Comment to Article 10.5: This Article and Article 10.6.2 apply only to the imposition of sanctions; they are not applicable to the determination of whether an anti -doping rule vi olation has occurred. |
They will only a pply in exceptional circumstances, for example, where an Athlete could prove that, despite all due care, he or she was sabotaged by a competitor. |
Conversely, No Fault or Negligence would not apply in the following circ umstances: (a) a positive test resulti ng from a mislabelled or contaminated vitamin or nutritional supplement (Athletes are responsible for what they ingest (Article 2.1) and have been warned against the possibility of supplement contamination);... |
However, depend ing on the unique facts of a particular case, any of the referenced illustrations could result in a reduced sanction under Article 10.6 based on No Significant Fault or Negligence.] |
10.6 Reduction of the Period of Ineligibility based on No Significant Faul t or Negligence 10.6.1 Reduction of Sanctions in Particular Circumstances for Violations of Article 2.1, 2.2 or 2.6. |
All reductions under Article 10.6.1 are mutually exclusive and not cumulative. |
10.6.1.1 Specified Substances or Specified Methods Where the anti-doping rule violation involves a Specified Substance (other than a Substance of Abuse ) or Specified Method , and the Athlete or other Person can establish No Significant Fault or Negligence , then the period of Ineligibility shall be, at a mi... |
10.6.1.2 Contaminated Products In cases where the Athlete or other Person can establish both No Signifi cant Fault or Negligence and that the detected Prohibited Substance (other than a Substance of Abuse ) came from a Contaminated Product , then the period of Ineligibility shall be, at a mi nimum, a repriman... |
[Comment to Article 10.6.1.2: In order to receive the benefit of this Article, the Athlete or other Person must establish not only that the detected Prohibited Substa nce came from a Contaminated Product but must also separately establish No Significant Fau lt or Negligence. |
It should be further noted that Athletes are on notice that they take nutritional supplements at their own risk. |
The sanction reduction based on No Significant Fault or Negligence has rarely been applied in Contaminated Product cases unless the Athlete has exercised a high level of caution before taking the Contaminated Product. |
In assessing whether the Athlete can establish the source of the Prohibit ed Substance, it would, for example, be significant for purposes of establishing whether t he Athlete actually Used the 30 | P a g e Contaminated Product, whether the Athlete had declared the product which was subsequently determined to be co... |
This Article should not be extended beyond products that have gone through some process of manufacturing. |
Where an Adverse Analytical Finding results from environment contamination of a “non-product” such as tap water or lake water in circumstan ces where n o reasonable person would expect any risk of an anti -doping rule violation, typically there would be No Fault or Negligence under Article 10.5.] |
10.6.1.3 Protected Persons or Recreational Athletes Where the anti -doping rule violation not involvi ng a Substance of Abuse is committed by a Protected Person or Recreational Athlete , and the Protected Person or Recreational Athlete can establish No Significant Fault or Negligence , then the period of I... |
10.6.2 Application of No Significant Fault or Negligence beyond the Application of Article 10.6.1 If an Athlete or other Person establishes in an individual case where Article 10.6.1 is not applicable that he or she bears No Significant Fault or Negligence , then, subject to further reduction or elimination as prov... |
If the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility is a lifetime, the reduced period under this Article may be no less than eight (8) years. |
[Comment to Article 10.6.2: Article 10.6.2 ma y be applied to any anti -doping rule violation, except those Articles where intent is an element of the anti-doping rule violation (e.g., Articles 2.5, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9 or 2.11) or an element of a particular sanction (e.g., Article 10.2.1) or a range of Ineli gibility is alr... |
10.7 Elimination, Reduction, or Suspension of Period of Ineligibility or other Consequences for Reasons Other than Fault 10.7.1 Substantial Assistance in Discovering or Establishing Code Violations 10.7.1.1 The WSF may, prior to an appellate decision under Ar ticle 13 or the expiration of the time to appeal, susp... |
After an appellate decision under Article 13 or the expiration of time to appeal, the WSF may only suspend a part of the otherwise applicable Consequences with the approval of WADA . |
The extent to which the otherwise applicable peri od of Ineligibility may be suspended shall be based on the seriousness of the anti -doping rule violation committed by the Athlete or other Person and the significance of the Substan tial Assistance provided by the Athlete or other Person to the effort to el iminate do... |
No more than three -quarters of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be suspe nded. |
If the 31 | P a g e otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility is a lifetime, th e non -suspended period under this Article must be no less than eight (8) years. |
For purposes of this paragraph, the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility shall not include an y period of Ineligibility that could be added under Article 10.9.3.2 of the se Anti -Doping Rules. |
If so requested by an Athlete or other Person who seeks to provide Substantial Assistance , the WSF shall allow the Athlete or other Person to provide the information to it subject to a Without Prejudice Agreement . |
If the Athlete or other Person fails to continue to cooperate and to provide the complete and credible Substantial Assistance upon which a suspension of Consequences was based, the WSF shall reinstate the original Consequences . |
If the WSF decides to reinstate a suspended Consequences or decides not to reinstate suspended Consequences, that decision may be appealed by any Person entitled to appeal under Article 13. |
10.7.1.2 To further encourage Athlete s and other Person s to provide Substantial Assistance to Anti-Doping Organisation s, at the request of the WSF or at the request of the Athlete or other Person who has (or has been asserted to have) committed an anti -doping rule violation or other violation o f the Code, WAD... |
In exceptional circumstances, WADA may agree to sus pensions of the period of Ineligibility and other Consequences for Substantial Assistance greater than those otherwise provided in this Article, or even no period of Ineligibility , no mandatory Public Disclosure and/or no return of prize money or payment of fine... |
WADA ’s approval shall be subject to reinstatement of Consequences , as otherwise provided in this Article. |
Notwithstanding Article 13, WADA ’s decisions in the context of this Article 1 0.7.1.2 ma y not be appealed. |
10.7.1.3 If the WSF suspends any part of an otherwise applicable sanction because of Substantial Assistance , then notice providing justification for the decision shall be provided to the other Anti-Doping Organisations with a r ight to appeal under Article 13.2.3 as provided in Article 14.2. |
In unique circumstances where WADA determines that it would be in the b est interest of anti -doping, WADA may authorise the WSF to enter into appropriate confidentiality agreements limiting or delaying the disclosure of the Substantial Assistance agreement or the nature of Substantial Assistance being provided. |
Comment to Arti cle 10.7.1: The cooperation of Athletes, Athlete Support Personnel and other Persons who acknowledge their mistakes and are willing to bring other anti -doping rule violations to light is important to clean sport.] |
10.7.2 Admission of an Anti -Doping Rule Vi olation in the Absence of Other Evidence Where an Athlete or other Person voluntarily admits the commission of an anti -doping rule violation before having received notice of a Sample collection which could establish an anti -doping rule violation (or, in th e case of an... |
[Comment to Arti cle 10.7.2: This Article is intended to apply when an Athlete or other Person comes forward and admits to an anti -doping rule violation in circumstances where no Anti -Doping Organisation is aware that an anti -doping rule violation might have been committed . |
It is not intended to apply to circumstances where the admission occurs after the Athlete or other Person believes he or she is about to be caught. |
The amount by which Ineligibility is reduced should be based on the likelihood that the Athlete or other P erson would have been caught had he/she not come forward voluntarily.] |
10.7.3 Application of Multiple Grounds for Reduction of a Sanction Where an Athlete or other Person establishes entitlement to reduction in sanction under more than one provision of Ar ticle 10.5, 10.6 or 10.7, before applying any reduction or suspension under Ar ticle 10.7, the otherwise applicable period of Ineli... |
If the Athlete or other Person establishes entitlement to a reduction or suspension of the period of Ineligibility under Article 10.7, then the period of Ineligibility may be reduced or suspended, but not below one -fourth of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility . |
10.8 Results Management Agreements 10.8.1 One (1) Year Reduction for Certain Anti -Doping Rule Violati ons Based on Early Admission and Acceptance of Sanction Where an Athlete or other Person , after being notified by the WSF of a potential anti -doping rule violation that carries a n asserted period of Ineligibi... |
Where the Athlete or other Person receives t he one (1) -year reduction in the asserted period of Ineligibility under this Article 10.8.1, no further reduction in the asserted period of Ineligibility shall be allowed under any other Article. |
[Comment to Article 10.8.1: For an example, if the WSF alleg es that an Athlete has violated Article 2.1. for Use of an anabolic steroid and asserts the applicable period of Ineligibility is four (4) years, then the Athlete may unilaterally reduce the period of Ineligibility to three (3) years by admitting the violatio... |
This resolves the case without any need for a hearing.] |
10.8.2 Case Resolution Agreement Where the Athlete or other Person admits an anti -doping rule violation after being confronted with the anti -doping rule violation by the WSF and agrees to Consequences acceptable to the WSF and WADA , at their sole discretion, then: (a) the Athlete or other Person may receive a r... |
In each case , however, where this Article is applied, the Athlete or other Person shall serve at least one -half of the agreed -upon period of Ineligibility going forward from the earlier of the date the Athlete or other Person accepted the imposition of a sanction or a Provisional Suspension which was subsequently ... |
The decision by WADA and the WSF to enter or not enter into a case resolution agreement, and the amount of the reduction to, and the starting date of, the period of Ineligibility are not matters for determination or review by a hearing body and are not subject to appeal under Article 13. |
If so requested by an Athlete or other Person who seeks to enter into a case resolution agreement under this Article, the WSF shall al low the Athlete or other Person to discuss an admission of the anti-doping rule violation with it subject to a Without Prejudice Agreement . |
[Comment to Article 10.8: Any mitigating or aggravating factors set forth in this Article 10 shall be considered in arriving at the Consequences set forth in the case resolution agreement an d shall not be applicable beyond the terms of that agreement. |
In some countries, the imposition of a period of Ineligibility is left entirely to a hearing body. |
In those countries, t he Anti -Doping Organisation may not assert a specific period of Ineligibil ity for purposes of Article 10.8.1 nor have the power to agree to a specific period of Ineligibility under Article 10.8.2. |
In these circumstances, Articles 10.8.1 and 10.8.2 will not be applicable but may be considered by the hearing body.] |
10.9 Multiple V iolations 10.9.1 Second or Third Anti -Doping Rule Violation 10.9.1.1 For an Athlete or other Person ’s second anti -doping rule violation, the period of Ineligibility shall be the greater of: (a) A six (6) months period of Ineligibility , or (b) A period of Ineligibility in the range between: ... |
10.9.1.2 A third anti-doping rule violation will always result in a lifetime period of Ineligibility , except if the third violation fulfils the condition for e limination or reduction of the period of Ineligibility under Article 10.5 or 10.6, or involves a violation of Article 2.4. |
In these particular cases, the period of Ineligibility shall be from eight (8) years to lifetime Ineligibility . |
10.9.1.3 The period o f Ineligibility established in Articles 10.9.1.1 and 10.9.1.2 may then be further reduced by the application of Article 10.7. |
10.9.2 An anti -doping rule violation for which an Athlete or other Person has established No Fault or Negligence shall not be cons idered a violat ion for purposes of this Article 10.9. |
In addition, an anti -doping rule violation sanctioned under Article 10.2.4.1 shall not be considered a violation for purposes of Article 10.9. |
10.9.3 Additional Rules for Certain Potential Multiple Viol ations 10.9.3.1 For purposes of imposing sanctions under Article 10.9 except as provided in Articles 10.9.3.2 and 10.9.3.3, an anti -doping rule violation will only be considered a second violation if the WSF can establish that the Athlete or other Person... |
If the WSF cannot establish this, t he violations s hall be considered together as one single first violation, and the sanction imposed shall be based on the violation that carries the more severe sanction including, the application of Aggravating Circumstances. |
Results in all Competitions dating back to t he earlier anti -doping rule violation will be Disqualified as provided in Article 10.10. |
[Comment to Article 10.9.3.1: The same rule applies where, after the imposition of a sanction, the WSF discovers facts involving an anti -doping rule vio lation that occ urred prior to notification for a first anti-doping rule violation e.g., the WSF shall impose a sanction based on the sanction that could have been im... |
10.9.3.2 If the WSF establishes that an Athlete or other Person committed an additional anti -doping rule violation prior to notification, and that the additional violation occurred twelve (12) months or more before or a fter the first -noticed violation, then the period of Ineligibility for the additional violation s... |
Where this Arti cle 10.9.3.2 applies, the violations taken together shall constitute a single violation for purposes of Article 10.9.1. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.