text stringlengths 1 17.8k |
|---|
Unless otherwise specified, references to Articles are references to Articles of these Anti -Doping Rules. |
Fundamental Rationale for the Code and TWIF 's Anti -Doping Rules Anti-doping programs are founded on the intrinsic value of sport. |
This intrinsic value is often referred to as "the spirit of sport": the ethical pursuit of human excellence through the dedicated perfection of each Athlete’s natural talents. |
Anti-doping programs seek to protect the health of Athletes and to provide the opportunity for Athletes to pursue human excellence without the Use of Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods . |
Anti-doping programs seek to maintain the integrity of spo rt in terms of respect for rules, other competitors, fair competition, a level playing field, and the value of clean sport to the world. |
The spirit of sport is the celebration of the human spirit, body and mind. |
It is the essence of Olympism and is reflec ted in the values we find in and through sport, including: • Health • Ethics, fair play and honesty • Athletes’ rights as set forth in the Code • Excellence in performance • Character and Education TWIF 2021 Anti -Doping Rules v1 Page 4 of 67 • Fun and joy • T... |
Doping is fundamentally contrary to the spirit of sport. |
Scope of these Anti -Doping Rules These Anti-Doping Rules shall apply to: (a) TWIF , including but not limited to its Executive Committee , board members, directors, officers and specified employees and Delegated Third Parties and their employees, who are involved in any aspect of Doping Control ; (b) each of i... |
Each o f the abovementioned Persons is deemed, as a condition of his or her participation or involvement in the sport, to have agreed to and be bound by these Anti -Doping Rules, and to have submitted to the authority of TWIF to enforce these Anti -Doping Rules, in cluding any Consequences for the breach thereof, a... |
Rather, such Person would only be subject to discipline for a violation of Code Articles 2.5 (Tampering), 2.7 (Trafficking), 2.8 (Administration), 2.9 (Complicity), 2. |
10 (Proh ibited Association) and 2.11 (Retaliation). |
Furthermore, such Person would be subject to the additional roles and responsibilities according to Code Article 21.3. |
Also, the obligation to require an employee to be bound by the Code is subje ct to applicable law. |
TWIF 2021 Anti -Doping Rules v1 Page 5 of 67 Within the overall pool of Athletes set out above who are bound by and required to comply with these Anti -Doping Rules, the following Athletes shall be considered to be International -Level Athletes for the purpose s of these Anti -Doping Rules, and, therefor e, the s... |
Having competed at such an event the Athlete shall be deemed an International Athlete for a period of 12 months. |
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 2.1 1 of these Anti -Doping 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. |
Hearings in doping cases will proceed based on the assertion that one or more of these specific rules have been violated. |
Athletes or other Persons shall be responsible for knowing 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 Marke rs 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 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 TWIF shall ensure that, as per Article 19 of these Anti -Doping Rules, any arrangements with their Executive Committee , board members, di... |
2 [Comment to Article 2.1.1: An anti -doping rule violation is committed under this Article without regard to an Athlete’s Fault. |
This rule has been referred to in various CAS decisions as “Strict Liability”. |
An Athlete’s Fault is taken into consideration in d etermining the Consequences of this anti -doping rule violation under Article 10. |
This principle has consistently been upheld by CAS.] |
TWIF 2021 Anti -Doping Rules v1 Page 6 of 67 Markers in the Athlete’s A Sample where the Athlete waives analysis of the B Sample and the B Sample is not analy sed; 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 o... |
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 . |
2.2 Use or Attempted Use by an Athlete of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method 4 2.2.1 It is the Athletes’ 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 fai lure 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.5 2.3 Evading, Refusing or Failing to Submit to Sample Collection by an Athlete 3 [Comment to Article 2.1.2: The Anti -Doping Organisation with Results Man... |
4 [Comment to Article 2.2: It has always been the case that Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method may be established by any reliable means. |
As note d in the Comment to Article 3.2, unlike the proof required to establish an anti -doping rule violation under Article 2.1, Use or Attempted Use may also be established by other reliable means such as admissions by the Athlete, witness statements, documentary evidence, conclusions drawn from longitudinal profil... |
For example, Use may be established based upon reliable analytical data from the analysis of an A Sample (without confirmatio n from an analysis of a B Sample) or from the analysis of a B Sample alone where the Anti -Doping Organi sation provides a satisfactory explanation for the lack of confirmation in the other Samp... |
5 [Comment to Article 2.2.2: Demonstrating the "Attempted Use" of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method requires proof of intent on the Athlete’s part. |
T he fact that intent may be required to prove this particular anti -doping rule violation does not undermine the Strict Liability principle established for violations of Article 2.1 and violations of Article 2.2 in respect o f Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method. |
An Athlete’s Use of a Prohibited Substance constitutes an anti -doping rule violation unless such Substance is not prohibited Out -of-Competition and the Athlete’s Use takes place Out -of-Competition. |
(However, the presence of a Prohibit ed Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in a Sample collected In -Competition is a violation of Article 2.1 regardless of when that Substance might have been administered.)] |
TWIF 2021 Anti -Doping Rules v1 Page 7 of 67 Evading Sample collection; or refusing or failing to submit to Sample collection without compelling justification after notification by a duly authorized Person .6 2.4 Whereabouts Failures by an Athlete Any combination of three (3) missed tests and/or filing fa... |
2.5 Tampering or Attempted Tampering with any Part 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 2.6.1 Possession by an Athlete In-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method ... |
2.6.2 Possession by an Athlete Support Person In -Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method , or Possession by an Athlete Support Person Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method which is prohibited Out-of-Competition in connection with an Athlete , Compet... |
7 2.7 Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking in any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method by an Athlete or Other Person 2.8 Administration or Attempt ed Administration by an Athlete or Other Person to any Athlete In -Competition of any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method , or Administration or... |
Main Document Only. |
For example, it would be an anti -doping rule violation of “evading Sample collection” if it were established that an Athlete was deliberately avoiding a Doping Control official to evade notification or Testing. |
A violation of “failing to submit to Sample c ollection” may be based on either intentional or negligent conduct of the Athlete, while “evading” or “refusing” Sample collection contemplates intentional conduct by the Athlete.] |
7 [Comment to Articles 2.6.1 and 2.6.2: Acceptable justification would no t include, for example, buying or Possessing a Prohibited Substance for purposes of giving it to a friend or relative, except under justifiable medical circumstances where that Person had a physician’s prescription, e.g., buying Insulin for a d... |
TWIF 2021 Anti -Doping Rules v1 Page 8 of 67 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 by another Person .8 ... |
The disqualifying status of such Person shall be in force for the longer of six (6) 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 individua l described in Artic... |
2.10.2 To establish a violation of Article 2.10, an Anti-Doping Organi sation must establish that the Athlete or other Person knew of the Athlete Support Person’ s disqualifying status. |
The burden shall be on the Athlete or other Person to establish that any association with an Athlete Support Person 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. |
Anti-Doping Organi sations that are aware of Athlete Support Personnel who meet the criteria described in Article 2.10.1.1, 2.10.1.2, or 2.10.1.3 shall submit that information to WADA .9 2.11 Acts by an Athlete or Other Person to Discourage or Retaliate Against Reporting to Authorities 8 [Comment to Article 2... |
9 [Comment to Article 2.10: Athletes and other Persons must not work with coaches, trainers, physicians or other Athlete Suppor t Personnel who are Ineligible on account of an anti -doping rule violation or who have been criminally convicted or professionally disciplined in relation to doping. |
This also prohibits association with any other Athlete who is acting as a coach or Athlete Support Person while serving a period of Ineligibility. |
Some examples of the types of association which are prohibited include: ob taining training, strategy, technique, nutrition or medical advice; obtaining therapy, treatment or prescriptions; providing any bodi ly products for analysis; or allowing the Athlete Support Person to serve as an agent or representative. |
Prohibited associa tion need not involve any form of compensation. |
While Article 2.10 does not require the Anti -Doping Organisation to notify the Athlete or other Person about the Athlete Support Person’s disqualifying status, such notice, if provided, would be important evidence to establish that the Athlete or other Person knew about the disqualifying status of the Athlete Support ... |
TWIF 2021 Anti -Doping Rules v1 Page 9 of 67 Where such conduct does not otherwise constitute a violation of Article 2.5: 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... |
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 ... |
For purposes of Article 2.11, 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.10 ARTICLE 3 PROOF OF DOPING 3.1 Burdens and Standards of Proof TWIF shall have the burden of establishing that an... |
The standard of proof shall be whether TWIF 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 p roof in all cases is greater than a mere balance of probability but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. |
Where these Anti -Doping 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, the standard of proof shall be by a balance of proba... |
Any Athlete or other Person 10 [Comment to Article 2.11.2: This Article is intended to protect Persons who make good faith reports, and does not prote ct Persons who knowingly make false reports.] |
[Comment to Article 2.11.2: Retaliation would include, for example, actions that threaten the physical or mental well -being or economic interests of the reporting Persons, their families or associates. |
Retalia tion would not include an Anti -Doping Organisation asserting in good faith an anti -doping rule violation against the reporting Person. |
For purposes of Article 2.11, a report is not made in good faith where the Person making the report knows the report to b e false.] |
11 [Comment to Article 3.1: This standard of proof required to be met by TWIF is comparable to the standard which is applied in most countries to cases involving professional misconduct.] |
12 [Comment to Article 3.2: For example, TWIF may establish an anti -doping rule violation under Article 2.2 based on the Athlete’s admissions, the credible testimony of third Persons, reliable documentary evidence, reliable analytical data from either an A or B Sample as provided in the Comments to Article 2.2, or... |
TWIF 2021 Anti -Doping Rules v1 Page 10 of 67 seeking to challenge whether the conditions for such presumption have been met or to rebut th is 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 initial hearing body, appe llate body or CAS, on its own initiative, may also inform WADA of an y such challenge. |
Within ten (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 as amicus curiae or otherwise provide evidence in such proceeding. |
In cases before CAS, at WADA ’s request, the CAS panel shall appoint an appropriate scientific expert to assist the panel in its evaluation of the challenge.13 3.2.2 WADA -accredited laboratories, and other laboratories approved by WADA , are presumed to have conducted Sample analysis and custodial procedures in acc... |
The Athlete or other Person may rebut this presumptio n by establishing that a departure from the International Standard for Laboratories occurred which could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding . |
If the Athlete or other Person rebuts the preceding presumption by showing that a departure from the International Standard for Laboratories occurred which could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding , then TWIF shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analyti... |
WADA’s decision in det ermining that Minimum Reporting Level or in determining which Prohibited Substances should be subject to Minimum Reporting Levels shall not be subject to challenge. |
Further, the laborator y’s estimated concentration of such Prohibited Substance in a Sample may only be an estimate. |
In no event shall the possibility that the exact concentration of the Prohibited Substance in the Sample may be below the Minimum Reporting Level constitute a defense to an anti -doping rule violation based on the presence of that P rohibited Substance in the Sample.] |
14 [Comment to Article 3.2.2: Error! |
Main Document Only. |
Error! |
Main Document Only. |
Error! |
Main Document Only. |
The burden is on the Athlete or other Person to establish, by a balance of probability, a departure from the International Standard for Laboratories that could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding. |
Thus, once the Athlete or other Person establishes the departure by a balance of probability, the Athlete or other Person’s burden on causation is the somewhat lower standard of proof – “could reasonably have caused.” If the Athlete or other Person satisfies these standards, the burden shifts to TWIF to prove to the c... |
15 [Comment to Article 3.2.3: Departures from an International Standard or other rule unrelated to Sample collection or handling , Adverse Passport Finding, or Athlete notification relating to whereabouts failure or B Sample opening – e.g., the International Standard for Education, International Standard for the Prot... |
Similarly, TWIF’s violation of the document referenced in Article 20.7.7 of the Code shall not constitute a defence to an anti -doping rule violation.] |
TWIF 2021 Anti -Doping Rules v1 Page 11 of 67 (i) a departure from the International Standard for Testing and Investigations related to Sample collection or Sample handling which could reasonably have caused an anti -doping rule violation based on an Adverse Analytical Finding , in which case TWIF shall hav... |
3.2.4 The facts established by a decision of a court or professional disciplinary tribunal of competent jurisdiction which is not the subject of a pending appeal shall be irrebuttable evidence against the Athlete or other Person to whom the decision pertained of those facts unless the Athlete or other Person est... |
3.2.5 The hearing panel in a hearing on an anti -doping rule violation may draw an inference adverse to the Athlete or other Person who is asserted to have committed an anti -doping rule violation based on the Athlete’s or other Person’s refusal, after a request made in a reasonable time in advance of the hearin... |
ARTICLE 4 THE PROHIBITED LIST 4.1 Incorporation of the Prohibited List These Anti -Doping Rules incorporate the Prohibited List , which is published and revised by WADA as described in Article 4.1 of the Code . |
16 [Comment to Article 3.2.3 (iii): TWIF would meet its burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analyt ical Finding by showing that, for example, the B Sample opening and analysis were observed by an independent witness and no irregularities were observed.] |
TWIF 2021 Anti -Doping Rules v1 Page 12 of 67 Unless provided otherwise in the Prohibited List or a revision, the Prohibited List and revisions shall go into effect under these Anti -Doping Rules three (3) months after publication by WADA , without requiring any further action by TWIF or its National Federation... |
All Athletes and other Persons shall be bound by the Prohibited List , and any revisions thereto, from the date they go into effect, without further formality. |
It is the responsibility of all Athletes and other Persons to familiari se themselves with the most up -to-date version of the Prohibited List and all revisions thereto. |
TWIF shall provide its National Federations with the most recent version of the Prohibited List . |
Each National Federation shall in turn ensure that its members , and the constituents of its members , are also provided with the most recent version of the Prohibited List .17 4.2 Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods Identified on the Prohibited List 4.2.1 Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods ... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.