Datasets:
timotheeplanes
/
doping

Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
 Community
1
text
stringlengths
1
17.8k
This should take place within seven (7) days after the reportin g of the initial review.
These additional reviews shall be conducted without knowledge of the initial review.
These three ISRM – January 2023 Page 52 of 54 (3) Experts now constitute the Expert Panel, composed of the Ex pert appointed in the initial review and these two (2) other Experts.
C.3.2 The review by the three (3) Experts must follow the same proced ure, where applicable, as presented in section C.2.2 of this Annex.
The three (3) Experts shall each provide their individual reports in ADAMS .
This should take place within seven (7) days after receipt of the request.
C.3.3 The Athlete Passport Management Unit is responsible for liaising with the Experts and for advising the Passport Custodian of the subsequent Expert assess ment.
The Experts can request further information, as they deem relevant for their re view, notably information related to medical conditions, Competition schedule and/or Sample(s) analysis results.
Such requests are directed via the Athlete Passport Management Unit to the Passport Custodian.
C.3.4 A unanimous opinion among the three (3) Experts is necessary in order to proceed further towards declaring an Adverse Passport Finding , which means that all three (3) Experts render an opinion of “Likely doping”.
The conclusion of the Exp erts must be reached with the three (3) Experts assessing the Athlete’s Passport with the same data.
[Comment to Article C.3.4: The three (3) Expert opinions cannot be accumulated over time based on different data.]
C.3.5 To reach a conclusion of “Likel y doping” in the absence of an Atypical Passport Finding , the Expert Panel shall come to the unanimous opinion that it is hig hly likely that the Passport is the result of the Use of a Prohibited Substance or Method and that there is no reasonably conceivable hypothesis under which the Passport is the result o f a normal physiological condition and highly unlikely that it is the result of patholog ical condition.
C.3.6 In the case when two (2) Experts evaluate the Passport as “Like ly doping” and the third Expert as “Suspicious”, the Athlete Passport Management Unit shall promptly confer with the Expert Panel before they finalize their opinion.
The group can also se ek advice from an appropriate outside Expert, although this must be done while maintaining st rict confidentiality of the Athlete’s Personal Information.
C.3.7 If no unanimity can be reached among the three (3) Experts, the Athlete Passport Management Unit shall promptly report the Passport as “Suspicio us”, update the Athlete Passport Management Unit Report, and recomm end that the Passport Cust odian pursue additional Testing and/or gather intelligence on the Athlete (refer to Information Gathering and Intelligence Sharing Guidelines), as appropriate.
C.4 Conference Call, Compilation of the Athlete Biological Passport Documentation Package and Joint Expert Report C.4.1 If a unanimous opinion of “Likely doping” is rendered by all th ree (3) Experts, the Athlete Passport Management Unit shall promptly declare a “Unanimous li kely doping” evaluation in the Athlete Passport Management Unit Report in ADAMS and should organize a conference call with the Expert Panel to initiate the next steps for the c ase, including proceeding with the compilation of the Athlete Biological Passport Documentation Package (see Technical Document for Athlete Passport Management Units) and drafting of the joint Expert re port.
In ISRM – January 2023 Page 53 of 54 preparation for this conference call, the Athlete Passport Management Unit should coordinate with the Passport Custodian to compile any potentially relevant information to share with the Experts (e.g.
suspicious analytical findings, relevant intellig ence and relevant pathophysiological information).
C.4.2 Once completed, the Athlete Biological Passport Documentation Package shall be sent by the Athlete Passport Management Unit to the Expert Panel, who will review it and provide a joint Expert report to be signed by all thr ee (3) Experts.
The conclusion within the joint Expert report shall be reached without interference from the Passport Custodian.
If necessary, the Expert Panel may request complementary information from the Athlete Passport Management Unit.
C.4.3 At this stage, the identity of the Athlete is not mentioned but it is accepted that specific information provided may allow to identify the Athlete .
This shall not affect the validity of the process.
C.4.4 If after review of the Athlete Biological Passport Documentation Package, the Expert Panel is no longer unanimous in their opinion of “Likely doping”, the Expert Panel shall update their respective opinions in ADAMS and the Athlete Passport Management Unit shall update the Athlete Passport Management Unit Report accordingly.
C.5 Issuing an Adverse Passport Finding C.5.1 If the Expert Panel confirms their unanimous position of “Likel y doping”, the Athlete Passport Management Unit shall promptly declare an Adverse Passport Finding in ADAMS that includes a written statement of the Adverse Passport Finding , the Athlete Biological Passport Documentation Package and the joint Expert report C.5.2 After reviewing the Athlete Biological Passport Documentation Package and joint Expert report, the Passport Custodian shall: a) Notify the Athlete of the Adverse Passport Finding in accordance with Article 5.3.2; b) Provide the Athlete the Athlete Biological Passport Documentation Package and the joint Expert report; c) Invite the Athlete to provide their own explanation, in a timely manner, of the da ta provided to the Passport Custodian.
C.6 Review of Explanation from Athlete and Disciplinary Proceedings C.6.1 Upon receipt of any explanation and supporting information from the Athlete, which should be received within the specified deadline, the Athlete Passport Management Unit shall forward it to the Expert Panel for review with any additional i nformation that the Expert Panel considers necessary to render its opinion in coordination with both the Passport Custodian and the Athlete Passport Management Unit, and update their recommendation in ADAMS as “Athlete’s explanation provided to Expert panel” .
At this stage, the review is no longer ISRM – January 2023 Page 54 of 54 anonymous.
The Expert Panel shall promptly reassess or reassert the case and reach one of the following conclusions: a) Unanimous opinion of “Likely doping” by the Experts based on the information in the Passport and any explanation provided by the Athlete ; or b) Based on the available information, the Experts are unable t o reach a unanimous opinion of “Likely doping” set forth above.
[Comment to Article C.6.1: Such a reassessment shall also take place when the Athlete does not provide any explanation.]
C.6.2 If the Expert Panel expresses the opinion set forth in section C.6.1(a), then the Athlete Passport Management Unit shall promptly update their recommenda tion in ADAMS as “APF confirmed” and inform the Passport Custodian, who shall charge the Athlete in accordance with Article 7 above and continue with Results Management in accordance with this International Standard .
C.6.3 If the Expert Panel expresses the opinion set forth in section C.6.1(b), the Expert Panel shall promptly update their respective opinions in ADAMS and the Athlete Passport Management Unit shall update the Athlete Passport Management Unit Report, accordingly, and recommend the Passport Custodian to pursue additional Testing and/or gather intelligence on the Athlete (refer to Information Gathering and Intelligence Sharing Guidel ines), as appropriate.
The Passport Custodian shall notify the Athlete and WADA of the outcome of the review.
C.7 Passport Re-setting C.7.1 In the event the Athlete has been found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation based on the Passport , the Athlete’s Passport shall be reset by the Passport Custodian at the start of the relevant period of Ineligibility and a new Biological Passport ID shall be assigned in ADAMS .
This maintains the Athlete’s anonymity for potential Athlete Passport Management Unit and Expert Panel reviews conducted in the future.
C.7.2 When an Athlete is found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation on any basis other than the Athlete Biological Passport , the Passport will remain in effect, except in those cases where the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method may have altered Passport Markers (e.g.
for an AAF reported for anabolic androgenic steroids, which may affect the Markers of the steroid profile, or for the Use of Agents Affecting Erythropoiesis or blood transfusions, which would alter the haematological Markers ).
The Passport Custodian shall consult with their Athlete Passport Management Unit following an Adverse Analytical Finding to determine whether a Passport reset is warranted.
In such instances, the Athlete’s profile(s) would be reset from the time of the beginning of the sanction.
International Olympic Committee Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXXIII Olympiad Paris 2024 (as of 30 May 2023 ) International Olympic Committee Maison Olympique 1007 Lausanne Telephone no: + 41 21 621 61 11 Fax no: + 41 21 621 62 16 IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXXIII Olympiad Paris 2024 2 / 49 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 3 ARTICLE 1 – DEFINITION OF DOPING .................................................................. 5 ARTICLE 2 – ANTI -DOPING RULE VIOLATIONS ..................................................... 5 ARTICLE 3 – PROOF OF DOPING ........................................................................... 8 ARTICLE 4 – THE PROHIBITED LIST ................................................................... 10 ARTICLE 5 – TESTING AND INVESTIGATIONS .................................................... 13 ARTICLE 6 – ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES .................................................................. 16 ARTICLE 7 – RESULTS MANAGEMENT , RESPONSIBILITY, INITIAL REVIEW, NOTICE AND PROVISIONAL SUSPENSIONS ................................................. 18 ARTICLE 8 – RESULTS MANAGEMENT : HEARING PROCESS .................................. 28 ARTICLE 9 – AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFICATION OF INDIVIDUAL RESULTS ........... 30 ARTICLE 10 – SANCTIONS ON INDIVIDUALS ........................................................ 30 ARTICLE 11 – CONSEQUENCES TO TEAMS ............................................................. 31 ARTICLE 12 – RESULTS MANAGEMENT : APPEALS .................................................. 32 ARTICLE 13 – CONFIDENTIALITY AND REPORTING .............................................. 35 ARTICLE 14 – DEEMED NOTIFICATIONS ............................................................... 37 ARTICLE 15 – DOPING AND MEDICATION CONTROL FOR HORSES –EQUINE ANTI -DOPING AND CONTROLLED MEDICATION REGULATIONS ............... 38 ARTICLE 16 – IMPLEMENTATION OF DECISIONS .................................................. 38 ARTICLE 17 – STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ............................................................. 40 ARTICLE 18 – AMENDMENT AND INTERPRETATION OF THE RULES ....................... 40 APPENDIX 1 – DEFINITIONS ................................................................................ 41 IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXXIII Olympiad Paris 2024 3 / 49 INTRODUCTION Preface The International Olympic Committee (IOC) is the supreme authority of the Olympic Movement and, in particular, the Olympic Games.
Any Person belonging in any capacity whatsoever to the Olympic Movement is bound by the provisions of the Olympic Charter and is required to abide by the decisions of the IOC .
The Olympic Charter reflects the importance that the IOC places on the fight against doping in sport and its support for the Code as adopted by the IOC.
The IOC, as Signatory to the Code, has established and adopted these Rules in accordance with the Code , expecting that, in the spirit of sport, it will contribute to the fight against doping in the Olympic Movement.
The Rules are complemented by other IOC documents and WADA documents including , inter alia, the International Standards .
Scope of these Rules These Rules apply in relation to the Olympic Games Paris 2024 .
They shall, without limitation, apply to all Anti -Doping Activities and Doping Controls over which the IOC has jurisdiction in relation to the Olympic Games Paris 2024 .
These Rules shall, without limitation, apply to (a) the IOC (including its Executive Board members, directors, officers, employees , the ITA and other Delegated Third Parties and their directors, officers and employees , who are involved in any aspect of Doping Control ); (b) all Athletes entered in or preparing for the Olympic Games Paris 2024 or who have otherwise been made subject to the authority of the IOC in connection with the Olympic Games Paris 2024 (see below); (c) all Athlete Support Person nel supporting such Athletes ; (d) other Persons participating in, or accredited to, the Olympic Games Paris 2024 including, witho ut any limitation, International Federations and NOCs ; (e) Paris 2024 (including its members, directors, officers, employees , who are involved in any aspect of Doping Control ); and ( f) any Person operating (even if only temporarily) under the authority of the IOC in relation to the Olympic Games Paris 2024 .
Athletes entered in the Olympic Games Paris 2024 or who have otherwise been made subject to the authority of the IOC in connection with the Ol ympic Games Paris 2024 are bound by these Rules as a condition of eligibility to participate in the Olympic Games Paris 2024 .
Athletes shall, without limitation, be subject to the authority of the IOC upon being put forward by their NOC as potential participants in the Olympic Games Paris 2024 in advance of the Period of the Olympic Games Paris 2024 and shall in particular be considered to be entered into the Olympic Games Paris 2024 upon being included in the final NOC delegation list.
The Athlete Support Person nel supporting such Athletes and other Persons participating in, or accredited to, the Olympic Games Paris 2024 are bound by these Rules as a condition of such participation or accreditation.
Persons operating (even if only tempo rarily) under the authority of the IOC in connection with the Olympic Games Paris 2024 are bound by these Rules as a condition of their participation or involvement in the Olympic Games Paris 2024 .
Italicized terms in these Anti -Doping Rules are defined terms in Appendix 1.
IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXXIII Olympiad Paris 2024 4 / 49 Delegation to the ITA The IOC is a Signatory to the Code and these Rules are adopted by the IOC in accordance with the mandatory provisions of the Code .
In accordance with the C ode and these Rules , the IOC has agreed to delegate some of its responsibilities related to the implementation of all or part of the Doping Control in relation to the Olympic Games Paris 2024 to the ITA as further described hereunder, including without lim itation, test distribution planning, TUEs and Results Management .
The ITA, in turn, may sub -delegate the implementation of Doping Control as appropriate and customary to other Delegated Third Parties (for example to Paris 2024 or Sample collection agencies).
References in these Rules to the ITA shall exceptionally, due to the IOC’s status as a Major Event Organi sation and where applicable within the context of the aforementioned delegation, be construed and interpreted as references to the ITA acting on behalf of the IOC .
Notwithstanding the above delegation to the ITA (or other Delegated Third Parties ), and in accord ance with the Code and the International Standard for Code Compliance by Signatories , the IOC shall, as the Signatory , remain responsible from a Code compliance perspective for all aspects of Doping Control conducted at the Olympic Games Paris 2024.
Further, and for the avoidance of doubt, while the ITA may act on its behalf, the IOC shall be considered as the party asserting anti -doping rule violations and for the purpose of any actions taken within the Results Management process, including proceedings in front of the hearing body or in any other matter under these Rules where that role would appropriately fall to a Signatory under the Code.
Without limitation, this includes the position of applicant, and in the event of appeal, appellant or respondent as the case may be.
IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXXIII Olympiad Paris 2024 5 / 49 ARTICLE 1 – DEFINITION OF DOPING Doping is defined as the occurrence of one or more of the anti -doping rule violations set forth in Article 2.1 through Article 2.
11 of these Rules .
ARTICLE 2 – ANTI -DOPING RULE VIOLATIONS The purpose of Article 2 is to specify the circumstances and conduct which constitute anti -doping rule violations.
Athletes and other Persons shall be responsible for knowing (and shall be deemed to know) what constitutes an anti -doping rule violation and the substances and methods which have been included on the Prohibited List.
The following constitute anti -doping rule violations: 2.1 Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an Athlete ’s Sample 2.1.1 It is the Athletes ’ personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters their bodies .
Athletes are responsible for any Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found to be present in their Samples .
Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, Fault, Negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete ’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an anti -doping rule violation under Article 2.1.
2.1.2 Sufficient proof of an anti -doping rule violation under Article 2.1 is established by any of the following: presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in the Athlete’s A Sample where the Athlete waives analysis of the B Sample and the B Sample is not analysed; or, where the Athlete’s B Sample is analy sed and the analysis of the Athlete’s B Sample confirms the presence of the Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found in the Athlete’s A Sample ; or where the Athlete’s A or B Sample is split into two parts and the analysis of the confirmation part of the split Sample confirms the presence of the Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found in the first part of the split Sample or the Athlete waives analysis of the confirmation part of the split S ample .
2.1.3 Excepting those substances for which a Decision Limit is specifically identified in the Prohibited List or a Technical Document , the presence of any reported quantity of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an Athlete ’s Sample shall constitute an anti -doping rule violation.
2.1.4 As an exception to the general rule of Article 2.1, the Prohibited List, International Standards , or Technical Documents may establish special criteria for reporting or the evaluation of certain Prohibited Substances .
IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXXIII Olympiad Paris 2024 6 / 49 2.2 Use or Attempted Use by an Athlete of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method 2.2.1 It is the Athlete s’ personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters their bodies and that no Prohibited Method is Used.
Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, Fault, Negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an anti -doping rule violation for Use of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method.
2.2.2 The success or failure of the Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is not material.
It is sufficient that the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method was Used or Attempted to be Used for an anti -doping rule violation to be committed.
2.3 Evading, Refus ing or Failing to Submit to Sample Collection by an Athlete Evading Sample collection; or refusing or failing to submit to Sample collection without compelling justification after notification by a duly authori sed Person .
2.4 Whereabouts Failures by an Athlete Any combination of three missed tests and/or filing failures, as defined in the International Standard for Results Management , within a twelve -month period by an Athlete in a Registered Testing Pool .
2.5 Tampering or Attempted Tampering with any P art of Doping Control by an Athlete or Other Person 2.6 Possession of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method by an Athlete or Athlete Support Person nel 2.6.1 Possession by an Athlete In- Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method, or Possession by an Athlete Out- of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method which is prohibited Out-of-Competition unless the Athlete establishes that the Possession is consistent with a TUE granted in accordance with Article 4.4 of the Code or other acceptable justification.
2.6.2 Possession by an Athlete Support Person nel In-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method, or Possession by an Athlete Support Person nel Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method which is prohibited Out -of-Competition in connection with an Athlete , Competition or training, unless the Athlete Support Person nel establishes that the Possession is consistent with a TUE granted to an Athlete in accordance with Article 4.4 of the Code or other acceptable justification.
2.7 Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking in any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method by an Athlete or Other Person IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXXIII Olympiad Paris 2024 7 / 49 2.8 Administration or Attempted Administration by an Athlete or Other Person to any Athlete In -Competition of any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method, or Administration or Attempted Administration to any Athlete Out -of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohib ited Method that is prohibited Out-of-Competition 2.9 Complicity or Attempted Complicity by an Athlete or Other Person Assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, conspiring, covering up or any other type of intentional complicity or Attempted complicity involving an anti-doping rule violation, Attempted anti-doping rule violation or violation of Article 10.
14.1 of the Code by another Person .
2.10 Prohibited Association by an Athlete or Other Person 2.10.1 Association by an Athlete or other Person subject to the authority of an Anti-Doping Organisation in a professional or sport- related capacity with any Athlete Support Person nel who: 2.10.1.1 If subject to the authority of an Anti -Doping Organisation, is serving a period of Ineligibility ; or 2.10.1.2 If not subjec t to the authority of an Anti -Doping Organisation, and where Ineligibility has not been addressed in a Results Management process pursuant to the Code , has been convicted or found in a criminal, disciplinary or professional proceeding to have engaged in conduct which would have constituted a violation of anti -doping rules if Code-compliant rules had been applicable to such Person.
The disqualifying status of such Person shall be in force for the longer of six years from the criminal, professional or disciplinary decision or the duration of the criminal, disciplinary or professional sanction imposed; or 2.10.1.3 Is serving as a front or intermediary for an individual described in Article 2.10.1 .1 or 2.10.1.2.
2.10.2 To establish a violation of Article 2.10 of these Rules , an Anti-Doping Organisation must establish that the Athlete or other Person knew of the Athlete Support Personnel’s disqualifying status .
The burden shall be on the Athlete or other Person to establish that any association with an Athlete Support Person nel described in Article 2.10 .1.1 or 2.10.1.
2 is not in a professional or sport- related capacity and/or that such association could not have been reasonably avoided.
If the IOC or ITA becomes aware of an Athlete Support Person nel who meets the criteria described in Article 2.10.
1.1, 2.10.1.
2 or 2.10 .1.3, it shall submit that information to WADA .
IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXXIII Olympiad Paris 2024 8 / 49 2.11 Acts by an Athlete or Other Person to Discourage or Retaliate Against Reporting to Authorities Where such c onduct does not otherwise constitute a violation of Article 2.5 of these Rules : 2.11.1 Any act which threatens or seeks to intimidate another Person with the intent of discouraging the Person from the good -faith reporting of information that relates to an alleged anti -doping rule violation or alleged non-compliance with the Code to WADA , an Anti-Doping Organi sation, law enforcement, regulatory or professional disciplinary body, hearing body or Person conducting an investigation for WADA or an Anti-Doping Organi sation.
2.11.2 Retaliation against a Person who, in good faith, has provided evidence or information that relates to an alleged anti -doping rule violation or alleged non-compliance with the Code to WADA , an Anti-Doping Organi sation, law enforcement, regulatory or professional disciplinary body, hearing body or Person conducting an investigation for WADA or an Anti-Doping Organi sation.
For purposes of Article 2.11 of these Rules , retaliation, threatening and intimidation include an act taken against such Person either because the act lacks a good faith basis or is a disproportionate response .
ARTICLE 3 – PROOF OF DOPING 3.1 Burdens and Standards of Proof The IOC (or the ITA acting before the hearing panel on behalf of the IOC as set forth in A rticle 8.1.1 of these Rules ) shall have the burden of establishing that an anti -doping rule violation has occurred.
The standard of proof shall be whether the IOC has established an anti -doping rule violation to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel bearing in mind the seriousness of the allegation which is made.
This standard of proof in all cases is greater than a mere balance of probabilit ies but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Where these Rules place the burden of proof upon the Athlete or other Person alleged to have committed an anti -doping rule violation to rebut a presumption or establish specified facts or circumstances, except as provided in Articles 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 of these Rules , the standard of proof shall be by a balance of probabilities .
3.2 Methods of Establishing Facts and Presumptions Facts related to anti -doping rule violations may be established by any reliable means, including admissions.
The following rules of proof shall be applicable in doping cases: IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXXIII Olympiad Paris 2024 9 / 49 3.2.1 Analytical methods and Decision Limits approved by WADA after consultation withi n the relevant scientific community , or which have been the subject of peer review , are presumed to be scientifically valid.
Any Athlete or other Person seeking to challenge whether the conditions for such presumption have been met or to rebut this presumption of scientific validity shall, as a condition precedent to any such challenge, first notify WADA of the challenge and the basis of the challenge.
The CAS (including CAS Anti -Doping Division) , the initial hearing body or appellate body on its own initiative may also inform WADA of any such challenge.
Within 10 days of WADA’s receipt of such notice and the case file related to such challenge , WADA shall also have the right to intervene as a party, appear amicus curiae or otherwise provide evidence in such proceeding.
In cases before the CAS Anti -Doping Division, at WADA ’s request, the CAS Anti-Doping Division panel shall appoint an appropriate scientific expert to assist the panel in its evaluation of the challenge.