text stringlengths 1 17.8k |
|---|
ISRM – January 2023 Page 22 of 54 This can notably and without limitation be the case in the context of Testing during or immediately before or after Major Events, or when the further postponement of the “B” Sample analysis could significantly increase the risk of Sample degradation.] |
5.1.2.4 If the Athlete requests the “B” Sample analysis but claims that they and/or their representative is not available on the scheduled date ind icated by the Results Management Authority, the Results Management Authority shall liaise with the Laboratory and propose (at least) two (2) alternative dates. |
[Comment to Article 5.1.2.4: The alternative dates should take into account: (1) the reasons for the Athlete’s unavailability; and (2) the need to avoid any degradation of the Sample and ensure timely Results Management.] |
5.1.2.5 If the Athlete and their representative claim not to be available on the alternative dates proposed, the Results Management Authority shall instruct the Laboratory to proceed regardless and appoint an Independent Witness to verify that the “B” Sample container shows no signs of Tampering and that the identifying numbers match that on the collection documentation. |
[Comment to Article 5.1.2.5: An Independent Witness may be appointed even if the Athlete has indicated that they will be present and/or represented.] |
5.1.2.6 If the results of the “B” Sample analysis confirm the results of the “A” Sample analysis, the Results Management Authority shall promptly notify the Athlete of such results and shall grant the Athlete a short deadline to provide or supplement their explanations. |
The Athlete shall also be afforded the possibility to admit the anti-doping rule violation to potentia lly benefit from a one-year reduction in the period of Ineligibility under Code Article 10.8.1 , if applicable, and/or to voluntarily accept a Provisional Suspension as per Code Article 7.4.4. |
5.1.2.7 Upon receipt of any explanation from an Athlete , the Results Management Authority may, without limitation, request further information and/or documents from the Athlete within a set deadline or liaise with third parties in order to assess the validity of the explanation. |
[Comment to Article 5.1.2.7: If the positive finding involves a Prohibited Substance subject to a permitted route (e.g. |
by inhalation, by transdermal or by ophthalmic Use) and the Athlete alleged that the positive finding came from the permitted route, the Results Management Authority should assess the credibility of the explanation by contacting third parties (including scientific experts) before deciding not to move forward with Results Management.] |
5.1.2.8 Any communication provided to the Athlete under this Article 5.1.2 shall simultaneously be provided by the Results Management Authority to the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization(s) , International Federation and WADA and shall promptly be reported into ADAMS . |
ISRM – January 2023 Page 23 of 54 [Comment to Article 5.1.2.8: To the extent not already set out in the communication to the Athlete, this notification shall include the following information (if applicable): the Athlete’s name, country, sport and discipline within the sport, whether the test was In-Competition or Out-of-Competition, the date of Sample collection, the analytical result reported by the Laboratory and other information as required by the International Standard for Testing and Investigations.] |
5.2 Atypical Findings 5.2.1 Upon receipt of an Atypical Finding , the Results Management Authority shall conduct a review to determine whether: (a) an applicable TUE has been granted or will be granted as provided in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions (see Article 5.1.1.1 by analogy); (b) there is any apparent departure from the International Standard for Testing and Investigations or International Standard for Laboratories that caused the Atypical Finding (see Article 5.1.1.2 by analogy) and/or (c) it is apparent that the ingestion of the Prohibited Substance was through a permitted route (see Article 5.1.1.3 by analogy). |
If that review does not reveal an applicable TUE, an apparent departure that caused the Atypical Finding or an ingestion through a permitted route, the Results Management Authority shall conduct the required investigation. |
[Comment to Article 5.2.1 : If the Prohibited Substance involved is subject to specific Results Management requirements in a Technic al Document, the Results Management Authority shall also follow the procedures set out therein. |
In addition, the Results Management Authority may contact WADA to determine which investigative steps should be undertaken. |
These investigative steps may be provided for by WADA in a specific notice or other document.] |
5.2.2 The Results Management Authority need not provide notice of an Atypical Finding until it has completed its investigation and decided whether it will bring the Atypical Finding forward as an Adverse Analytical Finding unless one of the following circumstances exists: a) If the Results Management Authority determines that the “B” Sample should be analyzed prior to the conclusion of its investigation, the Results Management Authority may conduct the “B” Sample analysis after notifying the Athlete , with such notice to include a description of the Atypical Finding and the information described in Article 5.1.2.1 c) to e) and Article 5.1.2.3; b) If the Results Management Authority receives a request, either from a Major Event Organization shortly before one of its International Events o r f r o m a s p o r t organization responsible for meeting an imminent deadline for s electing team members for an International Event , to disclose whether any Athlete identified on a list provided by the Major Event Organization or sport organization has a pending Atypical Finding , the Results Management Authority shall identify any Athlete after first providing notice of the Atypical Finding to the Athlete ; or ISRM – January 2023 Page 24 of 54 c) If the Atypical Finding is, in the opinion of qualified medical or expert personnel, likely to be connected to a serious pathology that requires urg ent medical attention. |
5.2.3 If after the investigation is completed the Results Management Authority decides to pursue the Atypical Finding as an Adverse Analytical Finding, then the procedure shall follow the provisions of Article 5.1 mutatis mutandis. |
5.3 Matters not Involving an Adverse Analytical Finding or Atypical Finding 5.3.1 Specific cases 5.3.1.1 Report of a potential Failure to Comply The pre-adjudication phase of Results Management of a possible Failure to Comply shall take place as provided in Annex A – Review of a Po ssible Failure to Comply. |
5.3.1.2 Whereabouts Failures The pre-adjudication phase of Results Management of potential Whereabouts Failures shall take place as provided in Annex B – Results Management for Whereabouts Failures. |
5.3.1.3 Athlete Biological Passport Cases The pre-adjudication phase of Results Management o f Atypical Passport Findings or Passports submitted to an Expert by the Athlete Passport Management Unit when there is no Atypical Passport Finding shall take place as provided in Annex C – Results Management Requirements and Procedures for the Athlete Biological Passport . |
5.3.2 Notification for specific cases and other anti-doping rul e violations under Article 5.3 5.3.2.1 At such time as the Results Management Authority considers that the Athlete or other Person may have committed (an) anti-doping rule violation(s), the Results Management Authority shall promptly notify the Athlete of: a) The relevant anti-doping rule violation(s) and the applicabl e Consequences ; b) The relevant factual circumstances upon which the allegation s are based; c) The relevant evidence in support of those facts that the Results Management Authority considers demonstrate that the Athlete or other Person may have committed (an) anti-doping rule violation(s); d) The Athlete or other Person ’s right to provide an explanation within a reasonable deadline; ISRM – January 2023 Page 25 of 54 e) The opportunity for the Athlete or other Person to provide Substantial Assistance as set out in Code Article 10.7.1 , to admit the anti-doping rule violation and potentially benefit f rom a one-year reduction in the period of Ineligibility in Code Article 10.8.1 (if applicable) or seek to enter into a case resolution agreement in Code Article 10.8.2; and f) Any matters relating to Provisional Suspension (including the possibility for the Athlete or other Person to accept a voluntary Provisional Suspension ) as per Article 6 (if applicable). |
5.3.2.2 Upon receipt of the Athlete’s or other Person’s explanation, the Results Management Authority may, without limitation, request further information and/or documents from the Athlete or other Person within a set deadline or liaise with third parties in order to assess the validity of th e explanation. |
5.3.2.3 The communication provided to the Athlete o r o ther Person shall simultaneously be provided by the Results Management Authority to the Athlete’s or other Person’s National Anti-Doping Organization(s) , International Federation and WADA and shall promptly be reported into ADAMS . |
[Comment to Article 5.3.2.3: To the extent not already set out in the communication to the Athlete or other Person, this notification shall include the following information (if applicable): the Athlete’s or other Person’s name, country, sport and discipline within the sport.] |
5.4 Decision Not to Move Forward If at any point during Results Management up until the charge under Article 7, the Results Management Authority decides not to move f orward with a matter, it must n otify the Athlete or other Person (provided that the Athlete or other Person had been already informed of the ongoing Results Management ) and give notice (with reasons) to the Anti-Doping Organizations with a right of appeal under Code Article 13.2.3. |
6.0 Provisional Suspensions 6.1 Scope 6.1.1 In principle, a Provisional Suspension means that an Athlete or other Person is barred temporarily from participating in any capacity in any Competition or activity as per Code Article 10.14.1 prior to the final decision at a hearing pursua nt to Article 8. |
6.1.2 Where the Results Management Authority is the ruling body of an Event or is responsible for team selection, the rules of such Results Management Authority shall provide that the Provisional Suspension is limited to the scope of the Event , respectively team selection. |
Upon notification under Article 5, the Internat ional Federation of the Athlete or other Person shall be responsible for Provisional Suspension beyond the scope of the Event . |
ISRM – January 2023 Page 26 of 54 6.2 Imposition of a Provisional Suspension 6.2.1 Mandatory Provisional Suspension 6.2.1.1 As per Code Article 7.4.1, Signatories identified in the provision shall adopt rules providing that when an Adverse Analytical Finding or Adverse Passport Finding (upon completion of the Adverse Passport Finding review process) is received for a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method other than a Specified Substance or Specified Method , a Provisional Suspension shall be imposed promptly upon or after the review and notification requ ired by Code Article 7.2. |
[Comment to Article 6.2.1.1: The review and notification required by Code Article 7.2 is set out in Article 5.] |
6.2.1.2 A mandatory Provisional Suspension may be eliminated if: (i) the Athlete demonstrates to the hearing panel that the violation is likely to have involved a Contaminated Product , or (ii) the violation involves a Substance of Abuse and the Athlete establishes entitlement to a reduced period of Ineligibility under Code Article 10.2.4.1. |
A hearing body’s decision not to eliminate a mandatory Provisional Suspension on account of the Athlete’s assertion regarding a Contaminated Product shall not be appealable. |
6.2.2 Optional Provisional Suspension As per Code Article 7.4.2, a Signatory may adopt rules, applicable to any Event for which the Signatory is the ruling body or to any team selection process for which the Signatory is responsible or where the Signatory is the applicable International Federation or has Results Management Authority over the alleged anti-doping rule violation, permitting Provisional Suspensions to be imposed for anti-doping rule violations not covered by Code Article 7.4.1 prior to analysis of the Athlete’s “B” Sample or final hearing as described in Code Article 8. |
The optional Provisional Suspension may also be lifted at the discretion of the Results Management Authority at any time prior to the hearing panel decision under Article 8, unless pro vided otherwise. |
[Comment to Article 6.2.2: Whether or not to impose an optional Provisional Suspension is a matter for the Results Management Authority to decide in its discretion, taking into account all the facts and evidence. |
The Results Management Authority should keep in mind that if an Athlete continues to compete after being notified and/or charged in respect of an anti-doping rule violation and is subsequently found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation, any results, prizes and titles achieved and awarded in that timeframe may be subject to Disqualification and forfeited. |
Nothing in this provision prevents provisional measures (including a lifting of the Provisional Suspension upon request of the Athlete or other Person) being ordered by the hearing panel.] |
ISRM – January 2023 Page 27 of 54 6.2.3 General Provisions 6.2.3.1 Notwithstanding Articles 6.2.1 and 6.2.2, a Provisional Suspension may not be imposed unless the rules of the Anti-Doping Organization p r o v i d e t h e Athlete or other Person with: (a) an opportunity for a Provisional Hearing , either before imposition of the Provisional Suspension or on a timely basis after imposition of the Provisional Suspension ; or (b) an opportunity for an expedited hearing in accordance with Code Article 8 on a timely basis after imposition of a Provisional Suspension . |
The rules of the Anti-Doping Organization shall also provide for an opportunity for an expedited appeal against the imposition of a Provisional Suspension , or the decision not to impose a Provisional Suspension , in accordance with Code Article 13. |
6.2.3.2 A Provisional Suspension shall start on the date on which it is notified (or deemed to be notified) by the Results Management Authority to the Athlete or other Person . |
6.2.3.3 The period of Provisional Suspension shall end with the final decision of the hearing panel conducted under Article 8, unless earlier lifted in accordance with this Article 6. |
However, the period of Provisional Suspension shall not exceed the maximum length of the period of Ineligibility that may be imposed on the Athlete or other Person based on the relevant anti-doping rule violation(s). |
6.2.3.4 If a Provisional Suspension is imposed based on an “A” Sample Adverse Analytical Finding and a subsequent “B” Sample analysis does not confirm the “A” Sample analysis result, then the Athlete shall not be subject to any further Provisional Suspension on account of a violation of Code Article 2.1. |
[Comment to Article 6.2.3.4: The Results Management Authority may nonetheless decide to maintain and/or re-impose a Provisional Suspension on the Athlete based on another anti-doping rule violation notified to the Athlete, e.g. |
a violation of Code Article 2.2.] |
6.2.3.5 In circumstances where the Athlete (or the Athlete’s team as may be provided in the rules of the applicable Major Event Organization or International Federation) has been removed from an Event based on a violation of Code Article 2.1 and the subsequent “B” Sample analysis does not confirm the “A” Sample finding, if, without otherwise affecting the Event , it is still possible for the Athlete or team to be reinstated, the Athlete or team may continue to take part in the Event . |
6.3 Voluntary Provisional Suspension 6.3.1 As per Code Article 7.4.4, Athletes on their own initiative may voluntarily accept a Provisional Suspension if done so prior to the later of: (i) the expiration of ten (1 0) days from the report of the “B” Sample (or waiver of the “B” Sample ) or ten (10) days from notification of any other anti-doping rule violation, or (ii) t he date on which the Athlete first competes after such report or notification. |
Other Persons on their own initiative may ISRM – January 2023 Page 28 of 54 voluntarily accept a Provisional Suspension if done so within ten (10) days from notification of the anti-doping rule violation. |
Upon such volun tary acceptance, the Provisional Suspension shall have the full effect and be treated in the same manner a s if the Provisional Suspension had been imposed under Article 6.2.1 or 6.2.2; provided, however, at any time after voluntarily accepting a Provisional Suspension , the Athlete or other Person may withdraw such acceptance, in which event the Athlete or other Person shall not receive any credit for time previously served during the Provisional Suspension . |
6.4 Notification 6.4.1 Unless already notified under another provision of this International Standard , any imposition of a Provisional Suspension notified to the Athlete or other Person o r voluntary acceptance of a Provisional Suspension , or lifting of either, shall promptly be notified by the Results Management Authority to the Athlete’s or other Person’s National Anti-Doping Organization(s) , International Federation and WADA and shall promptly be reported into ADAMS . |
[Comment to Article 6.4.1: To the extent not already set out in the communication to the Athlete or other Person, this notification shall include the following information (if applicable): the Athlete’s or other Person’s name, country, sport and discipline within the sport.] |
7.0 Charge 7.1 If, after receipt of the Athlete or other Person ’s explanation or expiry of the deadline to provide such explanation, the Results Management Authority is (still) satisfied that the Athlete or other Person has committed (an) anti-doping rule violation(s), the Results Management Authority shall promptly charge the Athlete or other Person with the anti-doping rule violation(s) they are asserted to have breached. |
In this letter of charge, the Results Management Authority: a) Shall set out the provision(s) of its anti-doping rules asse rted to have been violated by the Athlete or other Person ; [Comment to Article 7.1 a): The Results Management Authority is not limited by the anti-doping rules violation(s) set out in the notification under Article 5. |
In its discretion, the Results Management Authority may decide to assert further anti-doping rule violation(s) in its notice of charge. |
Notwithstanding the above, whereas it is a Results Management Authority’s duty to set out all and any asserted anti-doping rule violations against an Athlete or other Person in the notice of charge, a failure to formally charge an Athlete with an anti-doping rule violation that is, in principle, an integral part of a more specific (asserted) anti-doping rule violation (e.g. |
a Use violation (Code Article 2.2) as part of a Presence violation (Code Article 2.1), or a Possession violation (Code Article 2.6) as part of an asserted Administration violation (Code Article 2.8)) shall not prevent a hearing panel from finding that the Athlete or other Person committed a violation of the subsidiary anti-doping rule violation in the event that they are not found to have committed the explicitly asserted anti-doping rule violation.] |
ISRM – January 2023 Page 29 of 54 b) Shall provide a detailed summary of the relevant facts upon which the assertion is based, enclosing any additional underlying evidence not already provid ed in the notification under Article 5; [Comment to Article 7.1 b): The Results Management Authority shall, however, not be prevented from relying on other facts and/or adducing further evidence not contained in either the notification letter under Article 5 or the charge letter under Article 7 during the Hearing Process at first instance and/or on appeal.] |
c) Shall indicate the specific Consequences being sought in the event that the asserted anti-doping rule violation(s) is/are upheld and that such Consequences shall have binding effect on all Signatories in all sports and countries as per Code Article 15; [Comment to Article 7.1 c): The Consequences of an anti-doping rule violation set out in the letter of charge shall include as a minim um the relevant period of Ineligibility and Disqualification. |
The Results Management Authority shall refer to ADAMS and contact WADA and other relevant Anti-Doping Organizations to determine whether any prior anti-doping rule violation exists and take such information into account in determining the relevant Consequences. |
The proposed Consequenc es shall in all circumstances be compatible with the provisions of the Code and shall be appropriate based on the explanations given by the Athlete or other Person or the facts as established by the Results Management Authority. |
For these purposes, it is expected that the Results Management Authority will review the explanations given by the Athlete or other Person and assess their credibility (for example, by checking the authenticity of documentary evidence and the plausibility of the explanation from a scientific perspective) before proposing any Consequences. |
If the Results Management phas e is substantially delayed by the review, the Results Management Authority shall inform WADA, setting out the reasons for the substantial delay.] |
d) Shall grant a deadline of not more than twenty (20) days fro m receipt of the letter of charge (which may be extended only in exceptional cases) to the Athlete or other Person to admit the anti-doping rule violation asserted and to accept the propo sed Consequences b y signing, dating and returning an acceptance of Consequences form, which shall be enclosed with the letter; e) For the eventuality that the Athlete or other Person does not accept the proposed Consequences , shall already grant to the Athlete or other Person a deadline provided for in the Results Management Authority’s anti-doping rules (which shall not be of more than twenty (20) days from receipt of the letter of charge and may b e extended only in exceptional cases) to challenge in writing the Results Management Authority’s assertion of an anti-doping rule violation and/or proposed Consequences , and/or make a written request for a hearing before the relevant hearing panel; f) Shall indicate that if the Athlete or other Person does not challenge the Results Management Authority’s assertion of an anti-doping rule violation or prop osed Consequences nor request a hearing within the prescribed deadline, the Results Management Authority shall be entitled to deem that the Athlete or other Person has waived their right to a hearing and admitted the anti-doping rule viol ation as well as accepted the Consequences set out by the Results Management Authority in the letter of charge; ISRM – January 2023 Page 30 of 54 g) Shall indicate that the Athlete or other Person may be able to obtain a suspension of Consequences if they provide Substantial Assistance under Code Article 10.7.1, may admit the anti-doping rule violation(s) within twenty (20) days from receipt of the letter of charge and potentially benefit from a one-year reduction in the period of Ineligibility under Code Article 10.8.1 (if applicable) and/or seek to enter into a case resolution agreement by admitting the anti-doping rule violation(s) under Code Article 10.8.2; and h) Shall set out any matters relating to Provisional Suspension as per Article 6 (if applicable). |
7.2 The notice of charge notified to the Athlete or other Person shall simultaneously be notified by the Results Management Authority to the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization(s) , International Federation and WADA and shall promptly be reported into ADAMS . |
[Comment to Article 7.2: To the extent not already set out in the notice of charge, this notification shall contain the following information (wherever applicable): Athlete’s or other Person’s name, country, sport and discipline within the sport, and, for a violation of Code Article 2.1, whether the test was In-Competition or Ou t-of-Competition, the date of Sample collection, the analytical result reported by the Laboratory and other information as required by the International Standard for Testing and Investigations, and, for any other anti-doping rule violation, the anti-doping rule(s) violated and the basis for the asserted violation(s).] |
7.3 In the event that the Athlete or other Person either (i) admits the anti-doping rule violation and accepts the proposed Consequences or (ii) is deemed to have admitted the violation and accepted the Consequences as per Article 7.1 f), the Results Management Authority shall promptly issue the decision and notify it in accordance with Ar ticle 9. |
7.4 If, after the Athlete or other Person has been charged, the Results Management Authority decides to withdraw the charge, it must notify the Athlete or other Person and give notice (with reasons) to the Anti-Doping Organizations with a right of appeal under Code Article 13.2.3. |
7.5 Subject to Article 7.6, in the event that the Athlete or other Person requests a hearing, the matter shall be referred to the Results Management Authority’s hearing panel and be dealt with pursuant to Article 8. |
[Comment to Article 7.5: Where a Results Management Authority has delegated the adjudication part of Results Management to a Delegated Third Party, the matter shall be referred to the Delegated Third Party.] |
7.6 Single hearing before CAS 7.6.1 Pursuant to Code Article 8.5, anti-doping rule violations asserted against International-Level Athletes , National-Level Athletes or other Persons may, with the consent of the Athlete or other Person , the Results Management Authority and WADA , be heard in a single hearing directly at CAS under CAS appellate procedures, with no requirement for a prior hearing, or as otherwise agreed by the parties. |
7.6.2 If the Athlete or other Person and the Results Management Authority agree to proceed with a single hearing before CAS, it shall be the responsibility of the Results Management Authority to liaise in writing with WADA to determine whether it agrees to ISRM – January 2023 Page 31 of 54 the proposal. |
Should WADA not agree (in its entire discretion), then the case shall be heard by the Results Management Authority’s hearing panel at first instance. |
[Comment to Article 7.6.2: In the event that all relevant parties agree to refer the case to the CAS as a single instance, the Results Management Authority shall promptly notify any other Anti-Doping Organization with a right of appeal upon initiating the proceedings so that the latter may seek to intervene in the proceedings (if they wish to). |
The final decision rendered by the CAS shall not be subject to any appeal, save to the Swiss Federal Tribunal.] |
ISRM – January 2023 Page 32 of 54 PART FOUR: RESULTS MANAGEMENT – ADJUDICATION 8.0 Hearing Process 8.1 The rules of the Results Management Authority shall confer jurisdiction on hearing panels to hear and determine whether an Athlete or other Person subject to its anti-doping rules has committed an anti-doping rule violation and, if applicable, to impose the relevant Consequences . |
The Results Management Authority (or a Delegated Third Party upon delegation under Code Article 20) shall bring forward the charge before the hearing p anel. |
[Comment to Article 8.1: Results Management Authorities may also delegate the adjudication part of Results Management to Delegated Third Parties. |
It is not a Code requirement that a hearing should take place in person. |
Hearings may also take place remotely by the participants joining together using technology. |
There are no restrictions as to the technology that can or should be used, but include means such as conference calling, video conferencing technology or other online communication tools. |
Depending on the circumstances of a case, it may also be fair or necessary – for example, where all the facts are agreed and the only issue is as to the Consequences – to conduct a hearing “in writing”, based on written materials without an oral hearing.] |
8.2 For the purposes of Article 8.1, a wider pool of hearing panel members shall be established, from which the hearing panels for specific cases shall be nomin ated. |
Appointment to the pool must be made based on anti-doping experience, including legal, sports, medical and/or scientific expertise. |
All members of the pool shall be appointe d for a period of no less than two (2) years (which may be renewable). |
[Comment to Article 8.2: The number of potential hearing panel members appointed to the wider pool depends on the number of affiliates and the anti-doping history (including the number of anti-doping rule violations committed in the past years) of the Anti-Doping Organization. |
At the very least, the number of potential hearing panel members shall be sufficient to ensure that Hearing Processes are timely conducted and provide for replacement possibilities in the event of a conflict of interest.] |
8.3 The applicable rules shall provide for an independent person or body to determine in their discretion the size and composition of a particular hearing pan el to adjudicate an individual case. |
At least one appointed hearing panel member must have a legal b ackground. |
[Comment to Article 8.3: For example, the independent person may be a designated chairperson of the pool. |
The relevant rules should also provide for a mechanism for the event that the independent person or body has a conflict of interest (e.g. |
the chairperson may be replaced by a designated vice-chairperson in the event of a conflict of interest, or by the most senior hearing panel member with no conflict of interest, where there is no vice-chairperson or both the chairperson and vice-chairperson are in a situation of conflict). |
The size and composition of the hearing panel may vary depending on the nature of the charge and the evidence put forward. |
The hearing panel may be composed of a single adjudicator. |
The chairperson of the pool can be appointed (or appoint themselves if applicable) to sit as ISRM – January 2023 Page 33 of 54 single adjudicator or hearing panel member. |
If a single adjudicator is appointed, they shall have a legal background.] |
8.4 Upon appointment to a hearing panel, each hearing panel member shall sign a declaration that there are no facts or circumstances known to him/her which migh t call into question their impartiality in the eyes of any of the parties, other than any circumstances disclosed in the declaration. |
If such facts or circumstances arise at a later st age of the Hearing Process, the relevant hearing panel member shall promptly disclose them to t he parties. |
[Comment to Article 8.4: For example, any member who is in any way connected with the case and/or the parties – such as family or close personal/professional ties and/or an interest in the outcome of the case and/or having expressed an opinion as to the outcome of the particular case – must openly disclose on the declaration all circumstances that might interfere with the impartial performance of their functions. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.