text stringlengths 1 17.8k |
|---|
In particular, no member shall have previously considered any TUE application, Results Management decision, or appeals in the same given case. |
8.1.1.4 The IWWF D oping Hearing Panel shall consist of an independent Chair and two (2) other independent members and three (3) substitute members. |
IWWF Anti -Doping Rules 2021 Page 34 of 88 Pages 8.1.1.5 Each member and substitute member shall be appointed by taking into consideration their requisite anti-doping experience including their legal, sports, medical and/or scientific expertise. |
Each member and substitute member shall be appointed for renewable terms of four (4) years. |
8.1.1.6 IWWF Doping Hearing Panel has to be in a position to conduct the hearing and dec ision- making process without interference from IWWF or any third party. |
8.1.2 Hearing Process 8.1.2.1 When IWWF sends a notice to an Athlete or other Person notifying them of a potential anti -doping rule violation, and the Athlete or other Person does not waive a hearing in accordance with Article 8.3.1 or Article 8.3.2, then the case shall be referred to the IWWF Doping Hearing Panel for hearing and adjudication, which shall be conducted in accordance with the principles described in A rticles 8 and 9 of the International Standard for Results Management . |
8.1.2.2 The Chair shall appoint three (3) members (which may include the Chair) to hear that case. |
When hearing a case, at least one (1) panel member shall be a qualified lawyer, with no less than three (3) years of relevant legal experience, and at least one (1) panel member shall be a qualified medical practitioner, with no less than three (3) years of relevant medical experience. |
8.1.2.3 Upon appointment by the Chair as a member o f IWWF Doping H earing Panel, each member must also sign a declaration that there are no facts or circumstances known to him or her which might call into question their impartiality in the eyes of any of the parties, other than those circumstances disclosed in the declaration. |
IWWF Anti -Doping Rules 2021 Page 35 of 88 Pages 8.1.2.4 Hearings held in connection with Event s in respect to Athletes and other Persons who are subject to these Anti-Doping Rules may be conducted by an expedited process where permitted by the IWWF Doping Hearing Panel.35 8.1.2.5 WADA, the National Federation and the National Anti-Doping Organization of the Athlete or other Person may attend the hearing as observers. |
In any event, IWWF shall keep them fully apprised as to the status of pending cases and the result of all hearings . |
8.2 Notice of Decisions 8.2.1 At the end of the hearing, or promptly thereafter, the IWWF Doping Hearing Panel shall issue a written decision that conforms with Article 9 of the International Standard for Results Management and which includes the ful l reasons for the decision, the period of Ineligibility imposed, the Disqualification of results under Article 10.10 and, if applicable, a justification for why the greatest potential Consequences were not imposed. |
8.2.2 IWWF shall notify that decision to the Athlete or other Person and to other Anti-Doping Organizations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3, and shall promptly report it into ADAMS . |
The decision may be appealed as provided in Article 13. |
8.3 Waiver of Hearing 8.3.1 An Athlete or other Person against whom an anti -doping violation is asserted may admit that violation at any time, waive a hearing and accept the Consequences proposed by IWWF . |
8.3.2 However, if the Athlete or other Person against whom an anti -doping rule violation is asserted fails to dispute that assertion within twenty -one days the deadline otherwise specified in the notice sent by the IWWF asserting the violation, then they shall be deemed to have admitted the violation, to have waived a hearing, and to have accept ed the proposed Consequences . |
8.3.3 In cases where Article 8.3.1 or 8.3.2 applies, a hearing before IWWF Doping Hearing Panel shall not be required. |
Instead IWWF shall promptly issue a written decision that conforms with Article 9 of the International St andard for Results Management and which includes the full reasons for the decision, the period 35 [Comment to Article 8.1.2.4: For example, a hearing could be expedited on the eve of a major Event where the resolution of t he anti-doping rule violation is necessary to determine the Athlete's eligibility to participate in the Event, or during an Event where the resolution of the case will affect the validity of the Athlete's results or continued participation i n the Event.] |
IWWF Anti -Doping Rules 2021 Page 36 of 88 Pages of Ineligibility imposed, the Disqualification of results under Article 10.10 and, if applicable, a justification for why the greatest potential Consequences were not imposed. |
8.3.4 IWWF shall notify that decision to the Athlete or other Person and to other Anti -Doping Organizations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3, and shall promptly report it into ADAMS . |
IWWF shall Publicly Disclose that decision in accordance with Article 14.3.2. |
8.4 Single Hearing Before CAS 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 , IWWF (where it has Results Management responsibility in accordance with Article 7) and WADA , be heard in a single hearing directly at CAS .36 ARTICLE 9 AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFICATION OF INDIVIDUAL RESULTS An anti -doping rule violation in Individual Sports in connection with an In-Competition test automatically leads to Disqualification of the result obtained in that Competition with all resulting Consequences , including forfeiture of any medals, points and prizes.37 ARTICLE 10 SANCTIONS ON INDIVIDUALS 10.1 Disqualification of Result s in the Event during which an Anti -Doping Rule Violation Occurs 10.1.1 An anti -doping rule violation occurring during or in connection with an Event may, upon the decision of the ruling body of the Event , lead to Disqualification of all of the Athlete's individual results obtained in that Event with all Consequences , including forfeiture of all medals, points and prizes, except as provided in Article 10.1.2. |
36 [Comment to Article 8.4: In some cases, the combined cost of holding a hearing in the first instance at the international or national level, then rehearing the case de novo before CAS can be very substantial. |
Where all of the parties ident ified in this Article are satisfied that their interests will be adequately protected in a single hearing, there is no need for the Athlete or Anti -Doping Organizations to incur the extra expense of two (2) hearings . |
An Anti -Doping Organization may partici pate in the CAS hearing as an observer. |
Nothing set out in Article 8.4 precludes the Athlete or other Person and IWWF (where it has Results Management responsibility) to waive their right to appeal by agreement. |
Such waiver, however, only binds the parties to such agreem ent and not any other entity with a right of appeal under the Code] 37 [Comment to Article 9: In competitions with team ratings, any awards received by individual skiers will be Disqualified and not counted to the teams results. |
However, ev entual Disquali fication of the team will be as provided in Article 11. |
IWWF Anti -Doping Rules 2021 Page 37 of 88 Pages Factors to be included in considering whether to Disqualify other results in an Event might inc lude, for examp le, the seriousness of the Athlete’s anti-doping rule violation and whether the Athlete tested negative in the other Competitions .38 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 -doping rule violation occurred were likely to have been affected by the Athlete's anti-doping rule violation. |
10.2 Ineligibility for Presence, Use or Attempted Use , or Possession of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method The period of Ineligibility for a violation of Article 2.1, 2.2 or 2.6 shall be as follows, subject to potential elimination, reducti on or suspension pursuant to Article 10.5, 10.6 or 10.7: 10.2.1 The period of Ineligibility , subject to Article 10.2.4, shall be four (4) years where: 10.2.1.1 The anti -doping rule violation does not involve a Specified Substance or a Specified Method, unless the Athlete or other Person can establish that the anti -doping rule violation was not intentional.39 10.2.1.2 The anti -doping rule violation involves a Specified Substance or a Specified Method and IWWF can establish that the anti -doping rule viol ation 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 Person s 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 manifestly disregarded that risk. |
An anti-doping rule violation 38 [Comment to Article 10.1.1: Whereas Article 9 Disqualifies the result in a single Competition in which the Athlete tested pos itive (e.g., the 100 meter backstroke), this Article ma y lead to Disqualification of all results in all races during the Event (e.g., the swimming World Championships).] |
39 [Comment to Article 10.2.1.1: While it is theoretically possible for an Athlete or other Person to establish that the anti -doping rule vi olation was not intentional without showing how the Prohibited Substance entered one’s system, it is highly unlikely that in a doping case un der Article 2.1 an Athlete will be successful in proving that the Athlete acted unintentionally without establishin g the source of the Prohibited Substance.] |
IWWF Anti -Doping Rules 2021 Page 38 of 88 Pages resulting from an Adverse Analytical 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 Prohibited Substance was Used Out-of-Competition . |
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 Spec ified Substance and the Athlete can establish that the Prohibited Substance was Used Out-of-Competition in a context unrelated to sport performance.40 10.2.4 Notwithstanding any other provision in Article 10.2, where the anti-doping rule violation involve s a Substance o f 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 the period of Ineligibility shall be three (3) months Ineligibility . |
In addition, the peri od of Ineligibi lity 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 Abuse treatment program approved by IWWF. |
The period of Ineligibility established in this Article 10.2.4.1 is not subject to any reduction based on any provision in Article 10.6.41 10.2.4.2 If the ingestion, Use or Possession occurred In-Competition , and the Athlete can establish that the context of the ingestion, Use or Possession was unrelated to sport perform ance, then the ingestion, Use or Possession shall not be considered intentional for purposes of Article 10.2.1 and shall not provide a basis for a finding of Aggravating Circumstances under Article 10.4. |
40 [Comment to Article 10.2.3: Article 10.2.3 provides a special definition of “intentional” which is to be applied solely for purposes of Article 10.2.] |
41 [Comment to Article 10.2.4.1: The determinations as to w hether the treatment program is approved and whether the Athlete or other Person has satisfactorily completed the program shall be made in the sole discretion of IWWF. |
This Article is intended to give IWWF the leeway to apply their own judgment to identify and approve legitimate and reputable, as opposed to “sham”, treatment programs. |
It is anticipated, however, that the characteristics of legitimate treatment programs may vary widely and change over time such that it would not be practical for WADA to develop mandatory c riteria for acceptable treatment programs. ] |
IWWF Anti -Doping Rules 2021 Page 39 of 88 Pages 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 Article 10.6 or 10.7 are applicable: 10.3.1 For violations of Article 2.3 or 2.5, the period of Ineligibility shall be four (4) years except: (i) in the case of failing to submit to Sample collection, if the Athlete can establish that the commission of the anti -doping rule violation was not intentional, the period of Ineligibility shall be two (2) years; (ii) in all other cases, if the Athlete or other Person can establish exceptional circumstances that justify a reduction of the period of Ineligibility , the period of Ineligibility shall be in a range from two (2) years to four (4) years depending on the Athlete or other Person’s degree of Fault ; or (iii) in a case involving a Protected Person or Recreational Athlete , the period of Ineligibility shall be in a range between a maximum of two (2) years and, at a minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility , depending on the Protected Person or Recreational Athlete ’s degree of Fault. |
10.3.2 For violations of Article 2.4, the period of Ineligibility shall be two (2) years, subject to reduction down to a minimum of one (1) year, depending on the Athlete’s degree of Fault. |
T he flexibility between two (2) years and one (1) year of Ineligibility in this Article is not available to Athletes where a pattern of last- minute whereabouts changes or other conduct raises a serious suspicion that the Athlete was trying to avoid being av ailable for Testing. |
10.3.3 For violations 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 v iolation involv ing a Protected Person shall be considered 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.42 42 [Comment to Article 10.3.3: Those who are involved in doping Athletes or covering up doping should be subject to sanctions which are more severe than the Athletes who test positive. |
Since the authority of spor t organizations is generally limited to Ineligibility for accreditation, membership and other sport benefits, reporting Athlete Support Personnel to competent author ities is an important step in the deterrence of doping.] |
IWWF Anti -Doping Rules 2021 Page 40 of 88 Pages 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 mini mum of one (1) year, depending on the Athlete or other Person’s degree of Fault and other circumstances of the case.43 10.3.6 For violations of Article 2.11, the period of Ineligibility shall be a minimum of two (2) years, up to lifetime Ineligibility , depending on the seriousness of the violation by the Athlete or other Person .44 10.4 Aggravating Circumstances which may Increase the Period of Ineligibility If IWWF establishes in an individual case involving an anti -doping rule violation other than viol ations under Article 2.7 ( Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking), 2.8 ( Administration or Attempted Administration), 2.9 (Complicity) or 2.11 (Acts by an Athlete or Other Person to Discourage or Retaliate Against Reporting) that Aggravating Circumstances are present which justify the imposition of a period of Ineligibility greater than the standard sanction, then the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable shall be increased by an additional period of Ineligibility of up to two (2) years d epending on the seriousness of the violation and the nature of the Aggravating Circumstances , unless the Athlete or other Person can establish that he or she did not knowingly commit the anti -doping rule violation.45 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.46 43 [Comment to Art icle 10.3.5: Where the “other Person” referenced in Article 2.10 is an entity and not an individual, that entity may be disciplined as provided in Article 12.] |
44 [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 car ries the more severe sanction.] |
45 [Comment to Article 10.4: Violations under Articles 2.7 (T rafficking or A ttempted Trafficking), 2.8 (Administration or Attempted Administration), 2.9 (Complicity or Attempted Complicity) and 2.11 (Acts by an Athlete or Other Person to Discourage or Retaliate Against Reporting to Authorities ) are not included in t he application of Article 10.4 because the sanctions for these violations already build in sufficient discretion up to a lifetime ban to allow consideration of any Aggravating Circumstance.] |
46 [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 violation has occurred. |
They will only apply in exceptional circumstances, for example, where an Athlete could prove that, despite all due c are, he or she was sabotaged by a competitor. |
Conversely, No IWWF Anti -Doping Rules 2021 Page 41 of 88 Pages 10.6 Reduction of the Period of Ineli gibility based on No Significant Fault 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 Specifie d 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 minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility , and at a maximum, two (2) years of Ineligibility , depending on the Athlete’s or other Person’s degree of Fault. |
10.6.1.2 Contaminated Products In cases w here the Athlete or other Person can establish both No Significant 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 minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility , and at a maximum, two (2) years Ineligibility , depending on the Athlete or other Person’s degree of Fault.47 Fault or Negligence would not apply in the following circumstances: (a) a positive test resulting from a mislabeled 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); (b) the Administration of a Prohibited Substance by the Athlete’s personal physician or trainer without disclosure to the Athlete (Athletes are responsible for thei r choice of medical personnel and for advising medical personnel that they cannot be given any Prohibited Substance); and (c) sabotage of the Athlete’s food or dri nk by a spouse, coach or other Person within the Athlete’s circle of associate s (Athletes are responsible for what they ingest and for the conduct of those Persons to whom they entrust access to their food and drink). |
However, depending on the unique facts of a particular case, any of the referenced illustrations could result in a r educed sanction under Article 10.6 based on No Significant Fault or Negligence. ] |
47 [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 Substance c ame from a Cont aminated Product, but must also separately establish No Significant Fault or Negligence. |
It should be further noted that Athletes are on notice that they take nutritional supplements at their o wn 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 Prohibited S ubstance, it wo uld, for example, be significant for purposes of establishing whether the Athlete actually Used the Contaminated Product, whether the Athlete had declared the product which was subsequently determined to be contaminated on the Doping Control form. |
This Ar ticle 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 circumstances where no reasonable person would expect any risk of an anti -doping rule violation, typically there would be No Fault or Negligence under Article 10.5.] |
IWWF Anti -Doping Rules 2021 Page 42 of 88 Pages 10.6.1.3 Protected Persons or Recreational Athletes Where the anti -doping rule violation not involving a Substance o f 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 Ineligibility shall be, at a minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility , and at a maximum, two (2) years Ineligibility , depending on the Protected Person or Recreational Athlete ’s degree of Fault. |
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 provided in Article 10.7, the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be reduced based on the Athlete or other Perso n’s degree of Fault, but the reduced period of Ineligibility may not be less than one -half of the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable. |
If the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibili ty is a lifetime, the reduced period under this Article may be no less than eight (8) years.48 10.7 Elimination, Reduction, or Suspension of Period of Ineligibility or other Consequences for Reasons other than Fault 10.7.1 Substantial Assi stance in Disco vering or Establishing Code Violations49 10.7.1.1 IWWF may, prior to an appellate decision under Article 13 or the expiration of the time to appeal, suspend a part of the Consequences (other than Disqualification and mandatory Public Disclo sure) imposed i n an individual case where the Athlete or other Person has provided Substantial Assistance to an Anti-Doping Organization, criminal authority or professional disciplinary body which results in: (i) the Anti-Doping Organization discovering or bringing forward an anti -doping rule violation by another 48 [Comment to Article 10.6.2: Article 10.6.2 may be applied to any anti -doping rule violation except those Articles where intent is an element of the anti -doping rule violation (e.g., Article 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 Ineligibility is already provided in an Article based on the Athlete or other Person’s degree of Fault. ] |
49 [Comment to Article 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 impor tant to clean s port.] |
IWWF Anti -Doping Rules 2021 Page 43 of 88 Pages Person ; or (ii) which results in a criminal or disciplinary body discovering or bringing forward a criminal offense or the breach of professional rules committed by another Person and the informati on provided by the Person providing Substantial Assistance is made available to IWWF or other Anti-Doping Organization with Results Management responsibility ; or (iii) which results in WADA initiating a proceeding against a Signatory , WADA -accredited laboratory, or Athle te passport management unit (as defined in the International Standard for Laboratories ) for non -compliance with the Code, International Standard or Technical Document ; or (iv) with the approval by WADA , which results in a criminal or discipl inary body brin ging forward a criminal offense or the breach of professional or sport rules arising out of a sport integrity violation other than doping. |
After an appellate decision under Article 13 or the expiration of time to appeal, IWWF may only suspend a part of the otherwise applicable Consequences with the approval of WADA . |
The extent to which the otherwise applicable period 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 Substantial Assistance provided by the Athlete or other Person to the effort to eliminate doping in sport, non- compliance with the Code and/or sport integrity violations. |
No more than three -quarters of the otherwise applicabl e period of Ineligibility may be suspended. |
If the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility is a lifetime, the 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 any period of Ineligibility that could be added under Article 10.9.3.2 of these Anti -Doping Rules. |
If so requested by an Athlete or other Person who seeks to provide Substantial Assistance , IWWF 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 Consequen ces was based, IWWF shall reinstate the IWWF Anti -Doping Rules 2021 Page 44 of 88 Pages original Consequences . |
If IWWF decides to reinstate 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 Organizations , at the request of IWWF 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 of the Code, WADA may agree at any stage of the Results Management process, including after an appellate decision under Article 13, to what it considers to be an appropriate suspension of the otherwise -applicabl e period of Ineligibility and other Consequences . |
In exceptional circumstances, WADA may agree to suspensions 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 fines or costs. |
WADA ’s approval shall be subject to reinstatement of Consequences , as otherwise provided in this Article. |
Notwithstanding Article 13, WADA’s decisions i n the context of this Article 10.7.1.2 may not be appealed. |
10.7.1.3 If IWWF 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 Organizations with a right 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 best interest of anti-doping, WADA may authorize IWWF to enter into appropri ate confidentiality agreements limiting or delaying the disclosure of the Substantial Assistance agreement or the nature of Substantial Assistance being provided. |
10.7.2 Admission of an Anti -Doping Rule Violation in the Absence of Other Evidence Where a n Athlete or ot her 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 the case of an anti -doping rule violation other than Article 2.1, before receiving first notice of IWWF Anti -Doping Rules 2021 Page 45 of 88 Pages the admitted violation pursuant to Article 7) and that admission is the only reliable evidence of the violation at the time of admission, then the period of Ineligibility may be reduced, but not below one -half of the perio d of Ineligibility otherwise applicable.50 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 Article 10.5, 10.6 or 10.7, b efore applying any reduction or suspension under Article 10.7, the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility shall be determined in accordance with Articles 10.2, 10.3, 10.5, and 10.6. |
If the Athlete or other Person establishes entitlement to a reductio n 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 Agreemen ts 10.8.1 One (1) Year Reduction for Certain Anti -Doping Rule Violations Based on Early Admission and Acceptance of Sanction Where an Athlete or other Person , after being notified by IWWF of a potential anti -doping rule violation that carries an asser ted period of I neligibility of four (4) or more years (including any period of Ineligibility asserted under Article 10.4), admits the violation and accepts the asserted period of Ineligibility no later than twenty (20) days after receiving notice of an ant i-doping rule v iolation charge, the Athlete or other Person may receive a one (1) year reduction in the period of Ineligibility asserted by IWWF. |
Where the Athlete or other Person receives the one (1) year reduction in the asserted period of Ineligibility under this Arti cle 10.8.1, no further reduction in the asserted period of Ineligibility shall be allowed under any other Article.51 50 [Comment to Article 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 Organization 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 Perso n believes he or she is about to be caught. |
The amount by which Ineligibility is reduced should be based on t he likelihood t hat the Athlete or other Person would have been caught had he or she not come forward voluntarily.] |
51 [Comment to Article 10.8.1: For example, if IWWF alleges that an Athlete has violated Article 2.1 for Use of an anabolic steroid and asser ts 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 violation and accepting the three (3) year period of Ineligibility within the time specifi ed in this Article, with no further reduction allowed. |
This resolves the case without any need for a hearing.] |
IWWF Anti -Doping Rules 2021 Page 46 of 88 Pages 10.8.2 Case Resolution Agreement Where the Athlete or other Person admits an anti -doping rule violation after being conf ronted with the anti-doping rule violation by IWWF and agrees to Consequences acceptable to IWWF and WADA , at their sole discretion, then: (a) the Athlete or other Person may receive a reduction in the period of Ineligibility based on an assessment by IWWF and WADA of the application of Articles 10.1 through 10.7 to the asserted anti -doping rule violation, the seriousness of the violation, the Athlete or other Person ’s degree of Fault and how promptly the Athlete or other Person admitted the violation; and (b) the period of Ineligibility may start as early as the date of Sample collection or the date on which another anti -doping rule violation last occurred. |
In each case, however, where this Article is applied, the Athlete or other Person shall serve at least one -half of t he 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 respected by the Athlete or other Person . |
The decision by WADA and IWWF 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 subjec t 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, IWWF shall allow the Athlete or other Person to discuss an admission of the anti -doping rule violation with it subject to a Without Prejudice Agreement .52 10.8.3 National regulations In the case that the Results Management authority is according to Article 7.1 a National Anti -Doping Organization and the rules governing the jurisdiction of this NADO state that the imposition of a period of Ineligibility is left entirely to a hearing body and that the Anti -Doping Organization may not assert a specific period of Ineligibility for purposes of Article 10.8.1 nor have the power to agree to a specific period of Ineligibility under Article 10.8.2., Articles 10.8.1 and 10.8.2 will not be applicable but may be considered by the hearing body. |
52 [Comment to Article 10.8: Any mitigating or aggravating factors set forth in this Article 10 shall be considered in arriving at the Consequen ces set forth i n the case resolution agreement, and shall not be applicable beyond the terms of that agreement.] |
IWWF Anti -Doping Rules 2021 Page 47 of 88 Pages 10.9 Multiple Violations 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) month period of Ineligibility ; or (b) A period of Ineligibility in the range between: (i) the sum of the period of Ineligibility imposed for the first anti -doping rule violatio n plus the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable to the second anti -doping rule violation treated as if it were a first violation, and (ii) twice the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable to the second anti -doping rule violation treated as if it were a first violation. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.