text stringlengths 1 17.8k |
|---|
WADA and the Signatory shall each nominate an arbitrator to sit on the CAS Panel, choosing either from the list of arbitrators specifically designated by CAS for cases arising under Code Article 24.1 or from the general CAS list of arbitrators, as each sees fit, and those two (2) arbitrators shall together choose a third arbitrator from the former list to act as President of the CAS Panel. |
If they cannot agree within three (3) days, the President of the CAS Appeal Arbitration Division will choose the President of the CAS Panel from the former list. |
Cases shall be completed expeditiously and (save in exceptional circumstances) the reasoned decision shall be issued no later than three (3) months after the date of appointment of the CAS Panel. |
That decision shall be publicly reported by CAS and the parties. |
ISCCS – January 2021 Page 42 of 61 9.4 Determination by CAS 9.4.1 If the Signatory disputes the alleged non -compliance and/or the proposed Signatory Consequences and/or the proposed Reinstatement conditions, then (in accordance with Code Article 24.1.6) it must notify WADA in writing within twenty -one (21) days of its receipt of the notice from WADA . |
WADA shall then file a formal notice of dispute with CAS, and the dispute will be resolved by the CAS Ordinary Arbitration Division in accordance with the CAS Code of Sports -related Arbitration and Mediation Rules and this International Standard for Code Compliance by Signatories (and in the case of conflict between them, the latter shall prevail). |
Swiss law will govern the proceedings. |
The seat of the arbitration, and the venue of any hearings, s hall be Lausanne, Switzerland. |
Unless the parties agree otherwise, the proceedings will be conducted in English and the CAS Panel that hears and determines the dispute will be composed of three (3) arbitrators. |
WADA and the Signatory shall each nominate an arbitrator to sit on the CAS Panel either from the list of arbitrators specifically designated by CAS for cases arising under Code Article 24.1 or from the general CAS list of arbitrators, as each sees fit, and those two (2) arbitrators shall together choose a third arbitrator from the former list to act as the President of the CAS Panel. |
If they cannot agree within three (3) days, the President of the CAS Ordinary Arb itration Division will choose the President of the CAS Panel from the former list. |
Third parties may intervene or apply to intervene (as applicable) as set out in Code Article 24.1.7. |
Cases shall be completed expeditiously and (save in exceptional circumst ances) the reasoned decision shall be issued no later than three (3) months after the date of appointment of the CAS Panel. |
That decision shall be publicly reported by CAS and the parties. |
9.4.2 If the Signatory has disputed WADA’s allegation that the Signatory is no n-compliant with the Code and/or the International Standards , WADA shall have the burden of proving, on the balance of probabilities, that the Signatory is non- compliant as alleged. |
If the CAS Panel decides that WADA has met that burden, and if the Si gnatory has also disputed the Signatory Consequences and/or the Reinstatement conditions specified by WADA , the CAS Panel will also consider, by reference to the provisions of Article 1 0, what Signatory Consequences should be imposed and/or, by reference to the provisions of Article 11 , what conditions the Signatory should be required to satisfy in order to be Reinstated . |
9.4.3 Consistent with the principle of ‘last resort’, in any case (including not only ordinary but also fast track cases), if a Signatory does not meet the required timeframes for correcting Non-Conformities , and therefore the case is referred to the CRC , if the Signatory corrects the Non-Conformities to the satisfaction of the CRC at any time before Signatory Consequences are imposed by CAS , then it will avoid any such Signatory Consequences , save to the extent that costs have been incurred in pursuing the case before CAS (in which case the Signatory must cover those costs) and/or the failure to correct a Non -Conformity within the required timeframe has resulted in irreparable prejudice (in which case Signatory Consequences may be imposed to reflect that prejudice). |
9.4.4 No Signatory Consequences will com e into effect unless and until CAS so orders. |
In urgent cases, however, and where necessary (for example) to preserve the integrity of an Event , WADA may ask CAS to issue interim measures on a provisional basis. |
In ISCCS – January 2021 Page 43 of 61 such cases, any third party that would have a right to intervene pursuant to Code Article 24.1.7 has a right to be heard on the application for interim measures, to the extent it would be impacted by those measures. |
If the provisional interim measures are granted, the Signatory shall have no right of appeal against those provisional interim measures but instead shall have the right to an expedited hearing on the merits of the case; and if the provisional interim measures are not granted, then CAS may issue directions for an expedited hearing on the merits of the case. |
9.4.4.1 Where necessary (for example, to avoid the risk of destruction of evidence), WADA may make the request for provisional interim measures ex parte , even before the matter is brought to WADA’s Executive Committee or a formal notice of the dispute is sent to the Signatory in question. |
In such cases, if the provisional interim measures are granted, the Signatory shall have a right of appeal against those provisional interim measures to the CAS Appeals Arbitration Division. |
9.5 Recognition and Enforcement by Other Signatories 9.5.1 Once a decision as to a Signatory’s non-compliance is final (either because the Signatory did not dispute the contents of WADA ’s formal notice sent in accordance with Article 9 .2.3, or because the Signatory did dispute it but CAS ruled against the Signatory ), in accordance with Code Article 24.1.9 that decision shall be applicable worldwide and shall be recognized, respected and giv en full effect by all other Signatories in accordance with their authority and within their respective spheres of responsibility . |
9.5.2 Signatories shall ensure that they have due authority under their statutes, rules and regulations to comply with this requirem ent in a timely manner. |
9.6 Disputes about Reinstatement 9.6.1 If a Signatory wishes to dispute WADA ’s allegation that the Signatory has not yet met Reinstatement conditions imposed on it and therefore is not yet entitled to be Reinstated, it must advise WADA in writing within twenty -one (21) days of its receipt of the allegation from WADA (see Code Article 24.1.10). |
WADA shall then file a formal notice of dispute with CAS, and the dispute will be resolved by the CAS Ordinary Arbitration Division in accordance with Code Articles 24.1.6 to 24.1.8 and this Article 9. |
9.6.2 It will be WADA ’s burden to prove on the balance of probabilities that the Signatory has not yet met the Reinstatement conditions imposed on it and therefore is not yet entitled to be Reinstated . |
If the case was previously considered by a CAS Panel further to Code Article 24.1.6, if possible, the same CAS Panel shall be constituted to hear and determine this new dispute. |
ISCCS – January 2021 Page 44 of 61 10.0 Determining Signatory Consequences 10.1 Potential Signatory Consequences 10.1.1 The consequences that may be imposed, individually or cumulatively, for a Signatory’s Non-Conformity , based on application of the principles set out in Article 1 0.2 to the particular facts and circumstances of the case at hand, are set out at Code Article 24.1.12 . |
10.2 Principles Relevant to the Determination of the Signatory Consequences to be Applied in a Particular Case 10.2.1 The Signatory Consequences applied in a particular case shall reflect the nature and seriousness of the non- compliance in that case, taking into account both the degree of fault of the Signatory and the potential impact of its non- compliance on clean sport. |
As a guide to assessing the potential impact of a Signatory ’s non-compliance on clean sport, the different requirements of the Code and International Standards shall be categorized (in ascending order of gravity) as General , High Priority , or Critical, as described further in Annex A . |
Where the case involves more than one category of non-compliance, the Signatory Consequences imposed shall be based on the gravest category of non- compliance. |
In terms of the degree of fault of the Signatory , the obligation to comply is absolute, and so any alleged lack of intent or other fault is not a mitigating factor, but any fault or negligence on the part of a Signatory may impact the Signatory Consequences imposed. |
10.2.2 If there are Aggravating Factors in a particular case, that case shall attract significantly greater Signatory Consequences than a case where there are no Aggravating Factors . |
On the other hand, if a case includes extenuating circumstances, that may warrant the imposition of lesser Signatory Consequences . |
10.2.3 Signatory Consequences shall be applied without improper discrimination between different categories of Signator ies. |
In particular, given that International Federations and National Anti -Doping Organizations have equally important roles in fighting doping in sport, they should be treated the same ( mutatis mutandis ) when it comes to imposing Signatory Consequences for non -compliance with their respective obligations under the Code and the International Standar ds. |
10.2.4 The Signatory Consequences imposed in a particular case shall go as far as is necessary to achieve the objectives underlying the Code. |
In particular, they shall be sufficient to motivate full Code Compliance by the Signatory in question, to punish the Signatory ’s non-compliance, to deter further non- compliance by the Signatory in question and/or by other Signatories , and to incentivize all Signatories to ensure they achieve and maintain full and timely Code Compliance at all t imes. |
10.2.5 Above all else, the Signatory Consequences imposed should be sufficient to maintain the confidence of Athletes , other stakeholders, and of the public at large, in the commitment of WADA and its partners from the public authorities and from the sport movement to do what is necessary to defend the integrity of sport against the scourge of doping. |
This is the most important and fundamental objective, overriding all others. |
ISCCS – January 2021 Page 45 of 61 [Comment to Articles 10.2.4 and 10.2.5: As CAS ruled in ROC et al v IAAF , CAS 2016/O/4684 and again in RPC v IPC , CAS 2016/A/4745, if a Signatory fails to deliver an Anti-Doping Program that is compliant with the Code, then in order to restore a level play ing field, to provide a meaningful sanction that will provoke behavioral change within the Signatory’s sphere of influence, and to maintain public confidence in the integrity of International Events, it may be necessary (and therefore legitimate and propor tionate) to go so far as to exclude the Signatory’s affiliated Athletes and Athlete Support Personnel and/or its Representatives from participation in those International Events.] |
10.2.6 The Signatory Consequences should not go further than is necessary to achiev e the objectives underlying the Code. |
In particular, where a Signatory Consequence imposed is the exclusion of Athletes and/or Athlete Support Personnel from participation in one or more Events , consideration should be given to whether it is feasible (logistically, practically, and otherwise) for other relevant Signatories to create and implement a mechanism that enables the non- compliant Signatory ’s Athletes and/or Athlete Support Personnel to demonstrate that they are not affected by the Signatory ’s non-compliance. |
If so, and if it is clear that allowing them to compete in the Event(s) in a neutral capacity (i.e., not as representatives of any country) will not make the Signatory Consequences that have been imposed less effective, or be unfair to their competitors or undermine public confidence in the integrity of the Event(s) (e.g., because the Athletes have been subject to an adequate Testing regime for a sufficient period) or in the commitment of WADA and its stakeholders to do what is necessary to defend the integrity of sport against doping, then such a mechanism may be permitted, under the control of and/or subject to the approval of WADA (to ensure adequacy and consistency of treatment acr oss different cases). |
[Comment to Article 10 .2.6: An example is the IAAF ’s Competition Rule 22.1A, which (as discussed in ROC et al v IAAF , CAS 2016/O/4684) created the possibility for Athletes affiliated to a suspended member national federation to apply for special eligibility to compete in international competitions as ‘neutral’ Athletes, where they could show that the suspended member ’s failure to enforce the anti -doping rules did not affect the Athlete in any way, because he or she was subject to other, fully adequate anti -doping systems for a sufficiently long period to provide substantial objective assurance of integrity. |
In particular, the Athlete had to show that he or she had been subject to fully compliant Testing both in and out of competition that was equivalent in quality to the Testing to which his or her competitors in the international competition(s) in question were subject in the relevant period.] |
10.2.7 The Signatory Consequences applied should include cessation of the Signat ory’s non-compliant Anti-Doping Activities where necessary to maintain confidence in the integrity of sport but should be designed to ensure as far as practicable that there is no gap in the protection offered to clean Athletes while the Signatory is working to satisfy the Reinstatement conditions. |
Depending on the circumstances of the particular case, this may involve Supervision and/or Takeover of some or all of the Signatory ’s Anti-Doping Activities . |
Where the circumstances warrant, however, the Signatory may be permitted to continue to conduct some or all Anti-Doping Activities (e.g., Education) pending Reinstatement , provided this can be done without endangering clean sport. |
In such circumstances, Special Monitoring of the activities in question may be warranted. |
ISCCS – January 2021 Page 46 of 61 10.2.8 Unless specified otherwise, all Signatory Consequences shall remain in effect until the Signatory is Reinstated . |
10.2.9 The decision imposing the original Signatory Consequences (whether that decision is the WADA proposal that is accepted by the Signatory or the CAS decision if the WADA proposal is disputed by the Signatory ) may specify that the Signatory Consequences shall increase in the event that the Signatory does not satisfy all of the Reinstatement conditions by a set deadline. |
10.2.10 Applying the principles set out above, Annex B identifies the range of graded and proportionate Signatory Consequences that shall prima facie apply in cases involving non-compliance with Critical requirements or only High Priority requirements or only General requirements. |
The intention behind Annex B is to promote predictability and consistency in the imposition of Signatory Consequences across all cases. |
However, there shall be flexibility to vary within or even to depart from this range in a particular case, where the application of the principles set out above to the specific facts and circumstances of that case so warrant. |
In particul ar, the greater the degree of non -compliance (i.e., the more requirements with which the Signatory has failed to comply, and the more important those requirements are to clean sport), the greater the Signatory Consequences should be. |
11.0 Reinstatement 11.1 Object ive 11.1.1 Once a Signatory has been determined to be non- compliant, the objective is to help that Signatory achieve Reinstatement as quickly as possible, while ensuring that corrective actions have been taken that will deliver enduring Code Compliance by that Signatory . |
11.1.2 While WADA Management shall seek to guide the Signatory in its efforts to satisfy the Reinstatement conditions as quickly as is reasonably practicable, that objective shall not be allowed to compromise the integrity of the process and/or of the eventual outcome. |
11.2 Reinstatement Conditions 11.2.1 In accordance with Code Article 24.1.4, in the formal notice that it sends to the Signatory , setting out the Signatory ’s alleged non- compliance and the proposed Signatory Consequences , WADA shall also specify the conditions that it proposes the Signatory should have to satisfy in order to be Reinstated , which shall be as follows: 11.2.1.1 all of the matters that caused the Signatory to be declared non- compliant must have been corrected in full; 11.2.1.2 the Signatory must have demonstrated that it is ready, willing, and able to comply with all of its obligations under the Code and the International Standards , including (without limitation) carrying out all of its Anti -Doping Activities independently and without improper outside interference . |
If further ISCCS – January 2021 Page 47 of 61 Non-Conformities are identified after the Signatory has been declared non-compliant and before it is Reinstated , WADA will issue a new Corrective Action Report addressing those new Non -Conformities , and the normal process and timeframes for correcting them (set out in Art icle 8) will apply, but the Signatory will not be Reinstated until it has corrected all of the new Non-Conformities that relate to Critical or High Priority requirements ; 11.2.1.3 the Signatory must have respected and observed in full all of the Signatory Consequences applied to it; 11.2.1.4 the Signatory must have paid in full the following costs and expenses upon demand by WADA : (a) any specific costs and expenses reasonably incurred by WADA in Special Monitoring actions (i.e., outside WADA ’s routine monitoring activities) that identified the Signatory ’s non-compliance (e.g., the costs of any specific investigation conducted by WADA ’s Intelligence and Investigations Department that identified such non- compliance); (b) the costs and expenses reasonably incurred by WADA and/or Approved Third Parties from the date on which the decision that the Signatory was non -compliant became final until the date of the Signatory ’s Reinstatement , including (without limitation) costs and expenses reasonably incurred in implementing the Signatory Consequences (including the costs relating to Special Monitoring , Supervision or Takeover and the costs of monitoring the Signatory ’s compliance with the Signatory Consequences ) and the costs and expenses reasonably incurred in assessing the Signatory ’s efforts to satisfy the Reinstatement conditions; and 11.2.1.5 the Signatory must have satisfied any other conditions that WADA ’s Executive Committee may specify (on the recommendation of the CRC ) based on the particular facts and circumstances of the case. |
11.2.2 Within twenty -one (21) days of its receipt of the notice referenced in Code Article 24.1.4, in accordance with Code Article 24.1.6 the Signatory may dispute the Reinstatement conditions proposed by WADA , in which case WADA will refer the case to the CAS Ordinary Arbitration Div ision in accordance with Code Article 24.1.6 and CAS will determine whether all of the Reinstatement conditions proposed by WADA are necessary and proportionate . |
11.2.3 Subject to any contrary decision issued by CAS, to be eligible for Reinstatement a non-complia nt Signatory shall be required to demonstrate (by its own efforts but also by securing the support and assistance of public authorities and/or other relevant parties, as necessary) that it has satisfied each of the Reinstatement conditions specified by WAD A. |
11.2.4 WADA (and/or CAS) may establish an instalment plan for payment of the costs and expenses set out in Article 11.2.1.4. |
In such a case, provided the Signatory is fully up ISCCS – January 2021 Page 48 of 61 to date with payments under that instalment plan, once the Signatory has complied with all other Reinstatement conditions it may be Reinstated even if further instalments will only become due for payment after the date of Reinstatement . |
However, the Signatory remains liable to pay all remaining instalments after such Reinstatement . |
A failure to do so shall be processed as a new Non -Conformity with a High Priority requirement . |
11.3 The Reinstatement Process 11.3.1 WADA Management will monitor the Signatory’s efforts to satisfy the Reinstatement conditions and will report to the CRC periodically on the Signatory ’s progress. |
A Compliance Audit or other compliance monitoring tools may be used to assist in this task. |
11.3.2 Where a Signatory’s right to conduct some or all Anti-Doping Activities has been withdrawn, the CRC may recommend to WADA ’s Executive Committee that the Signatory be given back the right to conduct certain of those Anti-Doping Activities (under Special Monitori ng and/or Supervision by an Approved Third Party ) prior to full Reinstatement . |
This recommendation will only be made where the CRC agrees with WADA Management that the Signatory ’s corrective efforts to date mean it is in a position to implement such Anti -Doping Activities itself in a compliant manner. |
11.3.3 Once WADA Management considers that the Signatory has met all of the Reinstatement conditions, it will inform the CRC accordingly. |
11.3.4 If the CRC agrees with WADA Management that the Signatory has met all of the Reinstatement conditions, it will recommend that WADA’s Executive Committee confirm the Reinstatement of the Signatory . |
11.3.5 In accordance with Code Article 13.6, a decision by the CRC and/or WADA ’s Executive Committee that a Signatory has not yet met al l of the conditions for its Reinstatement may be appealed to CAS as provided in Article 9.6. |
11.3.6 Only WADA’s Executive Committee has the authority to Reinstate a Signatory that has been declared non- compliant. |
11.3.7 WADA shall publish notice of the Signatory ’s Reinstatement . |
Following the Signatory ’s Reinstatement , WADA shall monitor the Signatory ’s Code Compliance closely for such further period as it deems appropriate. |
11.3.8 When it confirms such Reinstatement , WADA ’s Executive Committee may impose special conditions recommended by the CRC with which the Signatory must comply post-Reinstatement in order to demonstrate the Signatory’s continuing Code Compliance , which may include (without limitation) conducting a Compliance Audit within a specified period following Reinstatement . |
Any breach of such conditions shall be processed in the same manner as any other new Non -Conformity . |
ISCCS – January 2021 Page 49 of 61 12.0 Transitional Provisions 12.1 Proceedings Pending as of 1 January 2021 12.1.1 Where a Corrective Action Report has been sent and/or a non -compliance procedure has been commenced prior to 1 January 2021, but remains pending after 1 January 2021, any procedural changes introduced by the revised version of this International Standard approved on 7 November 2019 will apply to that pending Corrective Action Report and/or non- compliance procedure, but any substantive changes introduced will not apply unless they are to the benefit of the Signatory in question. |
ISCCS – January 2021 Page 50 of 61 ANNEX A: CATEGORIES OF NON -COMPLIANCE The various different requirements imposed on Signatories by the Code and the International Standards shall be classified either as General , or as High Priority , or as Critical, depending on their relative importance to the fight against doping in sport. |
Examples of requirements in each of the three categories are listed below. |
Requirements that are not listed below shall be classified into either the General or the High Priority category, reasoning by analogy from the examples listed below (i.e., requirements that ar e considered as important to the fight against doping in sport as the requirements that are listed below as High Priority requirements shall be categorized as High Priority , etc.). |
The classification shall be made in the first instance by WADA Management, but the Signatory shall have the right to dispute the classification, and the CRC and WADA’s Executive Committee (based on the CRC ’s recommendation) may take a different view. |
If the Signatory continues to dispute the classification, ultimately CAS will decide. |
A.1. |
The following is a non- exhaustive list of requirements that are considered to be General requirements in the fight against doping in sport: a. |
The establishment of a process to ensure that Athletes and other Persons do not breach the prohibition against participation while Ineligible or Provisionally Suspended, as described in Code Article 10.14. b. |
In cases where it has been determined after a hearing or appeal that an Athlete or other Person has not committed an anti -doping rule violation, using reasonable efforts to obtain the consent of that Athlete or other Person to Publicly Disclose that decision, in accordance with Code Article 14.3.4. c. Establishing a process designed to ensure that a Person is able to confirm in writing or verbally his/her understanding of the terms on which his/her Personal Information is processed, in accordance with Articles 6 and 7 of the International Standard for the Protection of Privacy and Personal Information. |
d. Designating a Person within the Anti -Doping Organization who is accountable for compliance with the International Standard for the Protection of Privacy and Personal Information and all locally applicable privacy and data protection laws, in accordance with Article 4.5 of that Standard. |
A.2. |
The following is a non- exhaustive list of requirements that are considered to be High Prio rity requirements in the fight against doping in sport: a. |
The development, publication and implementation of an Education Plan in accordance with Code Article 18.2 which focuses activities on the Education Pool as described in Code Article 18.2.1 and t he International Standard for Education. |
b. |
The development of intelligence and investigation capabilities, as well as the use of these capabilities to pursue potential anti -doping rule violations, as required by Code Article 5.7 and in accordance with Articles 11 and 12 of the International Standar d for Testing and Investigations. |
ISCCS – January 2021 Page 51 of 61 c. The implementation of a documented procedure to ensure that Athletes (and/or a third party, where the Athlete is a Minor ) are notified that they are required to undergo Sample collection in accordance with Article 5.4 of the International Standard for Testing and Investigations. |
d. The implementation of the requirements set out in Articles 7.4.5 to 7.4.7 of the International Standard for Testing and Investigations for the documentation of the collection of a Sample from an Ath lete. |
e. The implementation of training/accreditation/re -accreditation programs for Sample Collection Personnel in accordance with Article 5.3.2 and Annex G of the International Standard for Testing and Investigations. |
f. The implementation of a conflict of interest policy in relation to the activities of the Sample Collection Personnel , in accordance with Articles 5.3.2, G.4.2 and G.4.3 of the International Standard for Testing and Investigations. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.