text stringlengths 1 17.8k |
|---|
]World Anti-Doping Code • 20151 PARTDoping Control46 S amples may be stored and subjected to further analyses for the purpose of Article 6.2 at any time exclusively at the direction of the anti-doping organization that initiated and directed Sample collection or W ada. |
(Any Sample storage or further analysis initiated by Wada shall be at Wada’s expense.) |
Further analysis of Samples shall conform with the requirements of the international Standard for Laboratories and the international Standard for Testing and investigations.ARTICLE 7 RESULTS MANAGEMENTEach a nti- d oping o rganization conducting results management shall establish a process for the pre-hearing administration of potential anti-doping rule violations that respects the following principles:ARTICLE 6 Analysis of SamplesARTICLE 7 Results Management[Comment to Article 7: Various Signatories have created their own approaches to results management. |
While the various approaches have not been entirely uniform, many have proven to be fair and effective systems for results management. |
The Code does not supplant each of the Signatories’ results management systems. |
This Article does, however, specify basic principles in order to ensure the fundamental fairness of the results management process which must be observed by each Signatory. |
The specific anti-doping rules of each Signatory shall be consistent with these basic principles. |
Not all anti-doping proceedings which have been initiated by an Anti-Doping Organization need to go to hearing. |
There may be cases where the Athlete or other Person agrees to the sanction which is either mandated by the Code or which the Anti-Doping Organization considers appropriate where flexibility in sanctioning is permitted. |
In all cases, a sanction imposed on the basis of such an agreement will be reported to parties with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3 as provided in Article 14.2.2 and published as provided in Article 14.3.2. |
]World Anti-Doping Code • 2015477.1 Responsibility f or Conducting Results Management Except as provided in Articles 7.1.1 and 7.1.2 below, results management and hearings shall be the responsibility of, and shall be governed by, the procedural rules of the anti-doping organization that initiated and directed Sample collection (or, if no Sample collection is involved, the anti-doping organization which first provides notice to an athlete or other Person of an asserted anti-doping rule violation and then diligently pursues that anti-doping rule violation). |
Regardless of which organization conducts results management or hearings, the principles set forth in this Article and Article 8 shall be respected and the rules identified in Article 23.2.2 to be incorporated without substantive change must be followed. |
if a dispute arises between anti-doping organizations over which anti-doping organization has results management responsibility, Wada shall decide which organization has such responsibility. |
W ada’s decision may be appealed to CaS within seven days of notification of the Wada decision by any of the anti-doping organizations involved in the dispute. |
The appeal shall be dealt with by CaS in an expedited manner and shall be heard before a single arbitrator. |
Where a national anti-doping organization elects to collect additional Samples pursuant to Article 5.2.6, then it shall be considered the anti-doping organization that initiated and directed Sample collection. |
However, where the national anti-doping organization only directs the laboratory to perform additional types of analysis at the national anti-doping organization’s expense, then the international Federation or Major event organization shall be considered the anti-doping organization that initiated and directed Sample collection. |
[Comment to Article 7.1: In some cases, the procedural rules of the Anti-Doping Organization which initiated and directed the Sample collection may specify that results management will be handled by another organization (e.g., the Athlete’s National Federation). |
In such event, it shall be the Anti-Doping Organization’s responsibility to confirm that the other organization’s rules are consistent with the Code. |
]World Anti-Doping Code • 20151 PARTDoping Control48ARTICLE 7 Results Management 7.1.1 i n circumstances where the rules of a n ational anti-doping organization do not give the national anti-doping organization authority over an athlete or other Person who is not a national, resident, license holder, or member of a sport organization of that country, or the national anti-doping organization declines to exercise such authority, results management shall be conducted by the applicable international Federation or by a third party as directed by the rules of the international Federation. |
Results management and the conduct of hearings for a test conducted by Wada on its own initiative, or an anti-doping rule violation discovered by Wada, will be conducted by the anti-doping organization designated by Wada. |
Results management and the conduct of hearings for a test conducted by the international Olympic Committee, the international Paralympic Committee, or another Major event organization, or an anti-doping rule violation discovered by one of those organizations, shall be referred to the applicable international Federation in relation to Consequences beyond exclusion from the event, disqualification of event results, forfeiture of any medals, points, or prizes from the event, or recovery of costs applicable to the anti-doping rule violation. |
[Comment to Article 7.1.1: The Athlete’s or other Person’s International Federation has been made the Anti-Doping Organization of last resort for results management to avoid the possibility that no Anti- Doping Organization would have authority to conduct results management. |
An International Federation is free to provide in its own anti-doping rules that the Athlete’s or other Person’s National Anti-Doping Organization shall conduct results management. |
]World Anti-Doping Code • 201549 7.1.2 Results management in r elation to a potential Whereabouts Failure (a filing failure or a missed test) shall be administered by the international Federation or the national anti-doping organization with whom the athlete in question files his or her whereabouts information, as provided in the international Standard for Testing and investigations. |
The anti-doping organization that determines a filing failure or a missed test shall submit that information to Wada through adaMS or another system approved by Wada, where it will be made available to other relevant anti-doping organizations.7.2 Review Regarding Adverse Analytical Findings Upon receipt of an adverse analytical finding, the anti-doping organization responsible for results management 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, or (b) there is any apparent departure from the international Standard for Testing and investigations or international Standard for Laboratories that caused the adverse analytical finding. |
World Anti-Doping Code • 20151 PARTDoping Control50ARTICLE 7 Results Management7.3 Notific ation After Review Regarding Adverse Analytical Findings if the review of an adverse analytical finding under Article 7.2 does not reveal an applicable tue or entitlement to a tue as provided in the international Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, or departure that caused the adverse analytical finding, the anti-doping organization shall promptly notify the athlete, in the manner set out in Articles 14.1.1 and 14.1.3 and its own rules, of: (a) the adverse analytical finding; (b) the anti-doping rule violated; and (c) the athlete’s right to promptly request the analysis of the B Sample or, failing such request, that the B Sample analysis may be deemed waived; (d) the scheduled date, time and place for the B Sample analysis if the athlete or anti-doping organization chooses to request an analysis of the B Sample; (e) the opportunity for the athlete and/or the athlete’s representative to attend the B Sample opening and analysis within the time period specified in the international Standard for Laboratories if such analysis is requested; and (f) the athlete’s right to request copies of the A and B Sample laboratory documentation package which includes information as required by the international Standard for Laboratories. |
if the anti-doping organization decides not to bring forward the adverse analytical finding as an anti-doping rule violation, it shall so notify the athlete and the anti-doping organizations as described in Article 14.1.2. in all cases where an athlete has been notified of an anti-doping rule violation that does not result in a mandatory Provisional Suspension under Article 7.9.1, the athlete shall be offered the opportunity to accept a Provisional Suspension pending the resolution of the matter.World Anti-Doping Code • 2015517.4 Re view of Atypical Findings As provided in the international Standard for Laboratories, in some circumstances laboratories are directed to report the presence of Prohibited Substances, which may also be produced endogenously, as atypical findings subject to further investigation. |
Upon receipt of an atypical finding, the anti-doping organization responsible for results management 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, or (b) there is any apparent departure from the international Standard for Testing and investigations or international Standard for Laboratories that caused the atypical finding. |
if that review does not reveal an applicable tue or departure that caused the atypical finding, the anti-doping organization shall conduct the required investigation. |
After the investigation is completed, the athlete and other anti-doping organizations identified in Article 14.1.2 shall be notified whether or not the atypical finding will be brought forward as an adverse analytical finding. |
The athlete shall be notified as provided in Article 7.3. |
7.4.1 The anti-doping organization will 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 anti-doping organization determines the B Sample should be analyzed prior to the conclusion of its investigation under Article 7.4, [Comment to Article 7.4: The “required investigation” described in this Article will depend on the situation. |
For example, if it has previously determined that an Athlete has a naturally elevated testosterone/epitestosterone ratio, confirmation that an Atypical Finding is consistent with that prior ratio is a sufficient investigation. |
]World Anti-Doping Code • 20151 PARTDoping Control52ARTICLE 7 Results Managementthe a nti- d oping o rganization 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 7.3(d)-(f). |
(b) if the anti-doping organization receives a request, either from a Major event organization shortly before one of its International events or a request from a sport organization responsible for meeting an imminent deadline for selecting 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 anti-doping organization shall so identify any such athlete after first providing notice of the atypical finding to the athlete.7.5 Review of Atypical Passport Findings and Adverse Passport Findings Review of atypical Passport findings and adverse Passport findings shall take place as provided in the international Standard for Testing and investigations and international Standard for Laboratories. |
At such time as the anti-doping organization is satisfied that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred, it shall promptly give the athlete notice, in the manner set out in its rules, of the anti-doping rule violated, and the basis of the violation. |
Other anti-doping organizations shall be notified as provided in Article 14.1.2. |
[Comment to Article 7.4.1(b): Under the circumstance described in Article 7.4.1(b), the option to take action would be left to the Major Event Organization or sport organization consistent with its rules. |
]World Anti-Doping Code • 2015537.6 Re view of Whereabouts Failures Review of potential filing failures and missed tests shall take place as provided in the international Standard for Testing and investigations. |
At such time as the international Federation or national anti-doping organization (as applicable) is satisfied that an Article 2.4 anti-doping rule violation has occurred, it shall promptly give the athlete notice, in the manner set out in its rules, that it is asserting a violation of Article 2.4 and the basis of that assertion. |
Other anti-doping organizations shall be notified as provided in Article 14.1.2.7.7 Review of Other Anti-Doping Rule Violations Not Covered by Articles 7.1–7.6 The anti-doping organization or other reviewing body established by such organization shall conduct any follow-up investigation into a possible anti-doping rule violation as may be required under applicable anti-doping policies and rules adopted pursuant to the Code or which the anti-doping organization otherwise considers appropriate. |
At such time as the anti-doping organization is satisfied that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred, it shall promptly give the athlete or other Person notice, in the manner set out in its rules, of the anti-doping rule violated, and the basis of the violation. |
Other anti-doping organizations shall be notified as provided in Article 14.1.2. |
[Comment to Articles 7.1, 7.6 and 7.7: For example, an International Federation typically would notify the Athlete through the Athlete’s National Federation. |
]World Anti-Doping Code • 20151 PARTDoping Control54ARTICLE 7 Results Management7.8 Identific ation of Prior Anti-Doping Rule Violations Before giving an athlete or other Person notice of an asserted anti-doping rule violation as provided above, the anti-doping organization shall refer to adaMS or another system approved by Wada and contact Wada and other relevant anti-doping organizations to determine whether any prior anti-doping rule violation exists.7.9 Principles Applicable to Provisional Suspensions 7.9.1 Mandatory Provisional Suspension after an adverse analytical finding. |
The Signatories listed below shall adopt rules providing that when an adverse analytical finding is received for a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method , other than a Specified Substance , a Provisional Suspension shall be imposed promptly after the review and notification described in Article 7.2, 7.3 or 7.5: where the Signatory is the ruling body of an event (for application to that event); where the Signatory is responsible for team selection (for application to that team selection); where the Signatory is the applicable international Federation ; or where the Signatory is another anti-doping organization which has results management authority over the alleged anti-doping rule violation. |
A mandatory Provisional Suspension may be eliminated if the athlete demonstrates to the hearing panel that the violation is likely to have involved a Contaminated Product. |
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. |
Provided, however, that a Provisional Suspension may not be imposed unless the athlete is given either: (a) an opportunity for a Provisional hearing, either before imposition of the World Anti-Doping Code • 201555Provisional Suspension or on a timely basis after imposition of the Provisional Suspension; or (b) an opportunity for an expedited hearing in accordance with Article 8 on a timely basis after imposition of a Provisional Suspension. |
7.9.2 Optional Provisional Suspension based on an adverse analytical finding for Specified Substances, Contaminated Products, or other Anti-Doping Rule Violations. |
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 Article 7.9.1 prior to analysis of the athlete’s B Sample or final hearing as described in Article 8. |
Provided, however, that a Provisional Suspension may not be imposed unless the athlete or other Person is given either: (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 Article 8 on a timely basis after imposition of a Provisional Suspension. |
if a Provisional Suspension is imposed based on an A Sample adverse analytical finding and a subsequent B Sample analysis (if requested by the athlete or anti-doping organization) does not confirm the A Sample analysis, then the athlete shall not be subject to any further Provisional Suspension on account of a violation of Article 2.1. in circumstances where the athlete (or the athlete’s team as may be provided in the rules World Anti-Doping Code • 20151 PARTDoping Control56ARTICLE 7 Results ManagementARTICLE 8 Right to a Fair Hearing and Notice of Hearing Decisionof the applicable Major event organization or international Federation) has been removed from a Competition based on a violation of Article 2.1 and the subsequent B Sample analysis does not confirm the A Sample finding, if, without otherwise affecting the Competition, it is still possible for the athlete or team to be reinserted, the athlete or team may continue to take part in the Competition.7.10 Notification of Results Management Decisions in all cases where an anti-doping organization has asserted the commission of an anti-doping rule violation, withdrawn the assertion of an anti-doping rule violation, imposed a Provisional Suspension , or agreed with an athlete or other Person to the imposition of a sanction without a hearing, that anti-doping organization shall give notice thereof as set forth in Article 14.2.1 to other anti-doping organizations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3. |
[Comment to Article 7.9: Before a Provisional Suspension can be unilaterally imposed by an Anti-Doping Organization, the internal review specified in the Code must first be completed. |
In addition, the Signatory imposing a Provisional Suspension shall ensure that the Athlete is given an opportunity for a Provisional Hearing either before or promptly after the imposition of the Provisional Suspension, or an expedited final hearing under Article 8 promptly after imposition of the Provisional Suspension. |
The Athlete has a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3. |
In the rare circumstance where the B Sample analysis does not confirm the A Sample finding, the Athlete who had been Provisionally Suspended will be allowed, where circumstances permit, to participate in subsequent Competitions during the Event. |
Similarly, depending upon the relevant rules of the International Federation in a Team Sport, if the team is still in Competition, the Athlete may be able to take part in future Competitions.Athletes and other Persons shall receive credit for a Provisional Suspension against any period of Ineligibility which is ultimately imposed or accepted as provided in Article 10.11.3 or 10.11.4. |
]World Anti-Doping Code • 2015577.11 Retir ement from Sport if an athlete or other Person retires while a results management process is underway, the anti-doping organization conducting the results management process retains jurisdiction to complete its results management process. |
if an athlete or other Person retires before any results management process has begun, the anti-doping organization which would have had results management authority over the athlete or other Person at the time the athlete or other Person committed an anti-doping rule violation, has authority to conduct results management. |
ARTICLE 8 RIGHT T O A FAIR HEARING AND NOTICE OF HEARING DECISION 8.1 F air Hearings For any Person who is asserted to have committed an anti-doping rule violation, each anti-doping organization with responsibility for results management shall provide, at a minimum, a fair hearing within a reasonable time by a fair and impartial hearing panel. |
A timely reasoned decision specifically including an explanation of the reason(s) for any period of Ineligibility shall be Publicly disclosed as provided in Article 14.3. |
[Comment to Article 8.1: This Article requires that at some point in the results management process, the Athlete or other Person shall be provided the opportunity for a timely, fair and impartial hearing. |
These principles are also found in Article 6.1 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and are principles generally accepted in international law. |
This Article is not intended to supplant each Anti-Doping Organization’s own rules for hearings but rather to ensure that each Anti-Doping Organization provides a hearing process consistent with these principles. |
][Comment to Article 7.11: Conduct by an Athlete or other Person before the Athlete or other Person was subject to the jurisdiction of any Anti-Doping Organization would not constitute an anti-doping rule violation but could be a legitimate basis for denying the Athlete or other Person membership in a sports organization.] |
World Anti-Doping Code • 20151 PARTDoping Control58ARTICLE 8 Right t o a Fair Hearing and Notice of Hearing DecisionARTICLE 9 Automatic Disqualification of Individual Results8.2 Ev ent Hearings Hearings held in connection with events may be conducted by an expedited process as permitted by the rules of the relevant anti-doping organization and the hearing panel.8.3 Waiver of Hearing The right to a hearing may be waived either expressly or by the athlete’s or other Person’s failure to challenge an anti-doping organization’s assertion that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred within the specific time period provided in the anti-doping organization’s rules. |
8.4 Notice of Decisions The reasoned hearing decision, or in cases where the hearing has been waived, a reasoned decision explaining the action taken, shall be provided by the anti-doping organization with results management responsibility to the athlete and to other anti-doping organizations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3 as provided in Article 14.2.1. |
[Comment to Article 8.2: For example, a hearing could be expedited on the eve of a major Event where the resolution of the 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 in the Event. |
]World Anti-Doping Code • 2015598.5 Singl e Hearing Before CAS Anti-doping rule violations asserted against International- level athletes or national- level athletes may, with the consent of the athlete, the anti-doping organization with results management responsibility, Wada, and any other anti-doping organization that would have had a right to appeal a first instance hearing decision to CaS, be heard directly at CaS, with no requirement for a prior hearing.ARTICLE 9 AUT OMATIC DISQUALIFICATION OF INDIVIDUAL RESULTSAn 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. |
[Comment to Article 9: For Team Sports, any awards received by individual players will be Disqualified. |
However, Disqualification of the team will be as provided in Article 11. |
In sports which are not Team Sports but where awards are given to teams, Disqualification or other disciplinary action against the team when one or more team members have committed an anti-doping rule violation shall be as provided in the applicable rules of the International Federation. |
][Comment to Article 8.5: 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 identified 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 hearings. |
An Anti-Doping Organization that wants to participate in the CAS hearing as a party or as an observer may condition its approval of a single hearing on being granted that right. |
]World Anti-Doping Code • 20151 PARTDoping Control60ARTICLE 10 Sanctions on IndividualsARTICLE 10 SANCTIONS ON INDIVIDUALS10.1 Disqualific ation of Results in the Event during which an Anti-Doping Rule Violation Occurs 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 10.1.1. |
Factors to be included in considering whether to disqualify other results in an event might include, for example, the seriousness of the athlete’s anti-doping rule violation and whether the athlete tested negative in the other Competitions. |
10.1.1 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 reduction or suspension pursuant to Article 10.4, 10.5 or 10.6: [Comment to Article 10.1: Whereas Article 9 Disqualifies the result in a single Competition in which the Athlete tested positive (e.g., the 100 meter backstroke), this Article may lead to Disqualification of all results in all races during the Event (e.g., the FINA World Championships). |
]World Anti-Doping Code • 201561 10.2.1 The period of Ineligibility shall be four years where: 10.2.1.1 The anti-doping rule violation does not involve a Specified Substance, unless the athlete or other Person can establish that the anti-doping rule violation was not intentional. |
10.2.1.2 The anti-doping rule violation involves a Specified Substance and the anti-doping organization can establish that the anti-doping rule violation was intentional. |
10.2.2 if Article 10.2.1 does not apply, the period of Ineligibility shall be two years. |
10.2.3 As used in Articles 10.2 and 10.3, the term “intentional” is meant to identify those athletes who cheat. |
The term, therefore, requires that the athlete or other Person engaged in conduct which he or she 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 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 Specified Substance and the athlete can establish that the Prohibited Substance was used out-of-Competition in a context unrelated to sport performance.World Anti-Doping Code • 20151 PARTDoping Control62ARTICLE 10 Sanctions on Individuals10.3 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 10.5 or 10.6 are applicable: 10.3.1 For violations of Article 2.3 or Article 2.5, the period of Ineligibility shall be four years unless, in the case of failing to submit to Sample collection, the athlete can establish that the commission of the anti-doping rule violation was not intentional (as defined in Article 10.2.3), in which case the period of Ineligibility shall be two years. |
10.3.2 For violations of Article 2.4, the period of Ineligibility shall be two years, subject to reduction down to a minimum of one year, depending on the athlete’s degree of fault. |
The flexibility between two years and one 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 available for testing. |
10.3.3 For violations of Article 2.7 or 2.8, the period of Ineligibility shall be a minimum of four years up to lifetime Ineligibility, depending on the seriousness of the violation. |
An Article 2.7 or Article 2.8 violation involving a Minor 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. |
[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 sport organizations is generally limited to Ineligibility for accreditation, membership and other sport benefits, reporting Athlete Support Personnel to competent authorities is an important step in the deterrence of doping. |
]World Anti-Doping Code • 201563 10.3.4 F or violations of Article 2.9, the period of Ineligibility imposed shall be a minimum of two years, up to four years, depending on the seriousness of the violation. |
10.3.5 F or violations of Article 2.10, the period of Ineligibility shall be two years, subject to reduction down to a minimum of one year, depending on the athlete or other Person’s degree of fault and other circumstances of the case.10.4 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. |
[Comment to Article 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. |
][Comment to Article 10.4: This Article and Article 10.5.2 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 care, he or she was sabotaged by a competitor . |
Conversely, No 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 2.1.1) 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 their 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 drink by a spouse, coach or other Person within the Athlete’s circle of associates (Athletes are responsible for what they ingest and for the conduct of those Persons to whom they entrust access to their food and drink). |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.