text stringlengths 1 17.8k |
|---|
Others may decide toadopt the models with modifications.Still other stakeholders may chooseto develop their own rules andregulations consistent with thegeneral principles and specificrequirements set forth in the Code. |
Other model documents or guidelinesfor specific parts of the anti-dopingwork may be developed based ongenerally recognized stakeholderneeds and expectations. |
This couldinclude models or guidelines fornational anti-doping programs,results management, Testing (beyondthe specific requirements set forth inthe International Standard forTesting), education programs, etc.All models of best practice will bereviewed and approved by WADAbefore they are included in theWorld Anti-Doping Program. |
]14 World Anti-Doping Code •2009FUNDAMENTAL RATIONALE FOR THE WORLD ANTI-DOPING CODEAnti-doping programs seek to preserve what is intrinsicallyvaluable about sport. |
This intrinsic value is often referred toas "the spirit of sport", it is the essence of Olympism; it ishow we play true. |
The spirit of sport is the celebration of thehuman spirit, body and mind, and is characterized by thefollowing values:• Ethics, fair play and honesty• Health • Excellence in performance• Character and education• Fun and joy• Teamwork• Dedication and commitment• Respect for rules and laws• Respect for self and other Participant s• Courage• Community and solidarityDoping is fundamentally contrary to the spirit of sport. |
To fight doping by promoting the spirit of sport, the Coderequires each Anti-Doping Organization to develop andimplement educational programs for Athlete s, includingyouth, and Athlete Support Personnel .PART ONE:DOPING CONTROL16 World Anti-Doping Code •2009INTRODUCTIONPart One of the Code sets forth specific anti-doping rulesand principles that are to be followed by organizationsresponsible for adopting, implementing or enforcing anti-doping rules within their authority, e.g., the InternationalOlympic Committee, International Paralympic Committee,International Federations, Major Event Organizations , andNational Anti-Doping Organization s. All such organizationsare collectively referred to as Anti-Doping Organization s.All provisions of the Code are mandatory in substance andmust be followed as applicable by each Anti-DopingOrganization and Athlete or other Person. |
The Code doesnot, however, replace or eliminate the need forcomprehensive anti-doping rules adopted by each Anti-Doping Organization . |
While some provisions of the Codemust be incorporated without substantive change by eachAnti-Doping Organization in its own anti-doping rules, otherprovisions of the Code establish mandatory guidingprinciples that allow flexibility in the formulation of rules byeach Anti-Doping Organization or establish requirementsthat must be followed by each Anti-Doping Organization butneed not be repeated in its own anti-doping rules. |
[Comment: Those Articles of the Codewhich must be incorporated into eachAnti-Doping Organization’s ruleswithout substantive change are setforth in Article 23.2.2. |
For example,it is critical for purposes ofharmonization that all Signatoriesbase their decisions on the samelist of anti-doping rule violations,the same burdens of proof andimpose the same Consequencesfor the same anti-doping ruleviolations. |
These rules must be thesame whether a hearing takes placebefore an International Federation,at the national level or before theCourt of Arbitration for Sport. |
Code provisions not listed in Article23.2.2 are still mandatory insubstance even though an Anti-Doping Organization is not requiredto incorporate them verbatim. |
Thoseprovisions generally fall into twocategories. |
First, some provisionsdirect Anti-Doping Organizations totake certain actions but there is noneed to restate the provision in theAnti-Doping Organization’s continuedDoping Control1PARTIntroduction17 World Anti-Doping Code •2009Anti-doping rules, like Competition rules, are sport rulesgoverning the conditions under which sport is played.Athlete s or other Person s accept these rules as a conditionof participation and shall be bound by these rules. |
EachSignatory shall establish rules and procedures to ensurethat all Athlete s or other Person s under the authority of theSignatory and its member organizations are informed ofand agree to be bound by anti-doping rules in force of therelevant Anti-Doping Organization s.Each Signatory shall establish rules and procedures toensure that all Athlete s or other Person s under the authorityof the Signatory and its member organizations consent to thedissemination of their private data as required or authorizedby the Code and are bound by and compliant with Code anti-own anti-doping rules. |
As anexample, each Anti-DopingOrganization must plan and conductTesting as required by Article 5, butthese directives to the Anti-DopingOrganization need not be repeated inthe Anti-Doping Organization’s ownrules. |
Second, some provisions aremandatory in substance but give eachAnti-Doping Organization someflexibility in the implementation of theprinciples stated in the provision. |
Asan example, it is not necessary foreffective harmonization to force allSignatories to use one single resultsmanagement and hearing process. |
Atpresent, there are many different, yetequally effective processes for resultsmanagement and hearings withindifferent International Federationsand different national bodies. |
TheCode does not require absoluteuniformity in results managementand hearing procedures; it does,however, require that the diverseapproaches of the Signatories satisfyprinciples stated in the Code. |
][Comment: By their participationin sport, Athletes are bound by thecompetitive rules of their sport.In the same manner, Athletes andAthlete Support Personnel should bebound by anti-doping rules basedon Article 2 of the Code by virtue oftheir agreements for membership,accreditation, or participation insports organizations or sports Eventssubject to the Code. |
Each Signatory,however, shall take the necessarysteps to ensure that all Athletesand Athlete Support Personnelwithin its authority are boundby the relevant Anti-DopingOrganization's anti-doping rules.] |
Doping Control18 World Anti-Doping Code •2009doping rules, and that the appropriate Consequences areimposed on those Athlete s or other Person s who are not inconformity with those rules. |
These sport-specific rules andprocedures aimed at enforcing anti-doping rules in a globaland harmonized way are distinct in nature from and are,therefore, not intended to be subject to or limited by anynational requirements and legal standards applicable tocriminal proceedings or employment matters. |
Whenreviewing the facts and the law of a given case, all courts,arbitral hearing panels and other adjudicating bodies shouldbe aware and respect the distinct nature of the anti-dopingrules in the Code and the fact that those rules represent theconsensus of a broad spectrum of stakeholders around theworld with an interest in fair sport.ARTICLE 1: DEFINITION OF DOPINGDoping is defined as the occurrence of one or more of theanti-doping rule violations set forth in Article 2.1 throughArticle 2.8 of the Code .ARTICLE 2: ANTI-DOPING RULE VIOLATIONSAthlete s or other Person s shall be responsible for knowingwhat constitutes an anti-doping rule violation and thesubstances and methods which have been included on theProhibited List .The following constitute anti-doping rule violations:[Comment ‘a’ to Article 2: Thepurpose of Article 2 is to specify thecircumstances and conduct whichconstitute anti-doping rule violations.Hearings in doping cases willproceed based on the assertionthat one or more of these specificrules has been violated. |
]1PARTArticle 1: Definition of DopingArticle 2: Anti-Doping Rule Violations19 World Anti-Doping Code •20092.1 Presence of a Prohibited Substance or itsMetabolite s or Marker s in an Athlete ’s Sample2.1.1 It is each Athlete ’s personal duty to ensure thatno Prohibited Substance enters his or her body.Athlete s are responsible for any ProhibitedSubstance or its Metabolite s or Marker s foundto be present in their Sample s. Accordingly, it isnot necessary that intent, fault, negligence orknowing Use on the Athlete ’s part bedemonstrated in order to establish an anti-doping violation under Article 2.1. |
[Comment to Article 2.1.1: Forpurposes of anti-doping ruleviolations involving the presenceof a Prohibited Substance (or itsMetabolites or Markers), the Codeadopts the rule of strict liability whichwas found in the Olympic MovementAnti-Doping Code (“OMADC”) and thevast majority of pre-Code anti-dopingrules. |
Under the strict liabilityprinciple, an Athlete is responsible,and an anti-doping rule violationoccurs, whenever a ProhibitedSubstance is found in an Athlete’sSample. |
The violation occurs whetheror not the Athlete intentionally orunintentionally Used a ProhibitedSubstance or was negligent orotherwise at fault. |
If the positiveSample came from an In-Competitiontest, then the results of thatCompetition are automaticallyinvalidated (Article 9 (AutomaticDisqualification of IndividualResults)). |
However, the Athlete thenhas the possibility to avoid or reducesanctions if the Athlete candemonstrate that he or she was notat fault or significant fault (Article10.5 (Elimination or Reduction ofPeriod of Ineligibility Based onExceptional Circumstances)) or incertain circumstances did not intendto enhance his or her sport performance(Article 10.4 (Elimination orReduction of the Period of Ineligibilityfor Specified Substances underSpecific Circumstances)).The strict liability rule for thefinding of a Prohibited Substancein an Athlete's Sample, with apossibility that sanctions may bemodified based on specified criteria,provides a reasonable balancebetween effective anti-dopingenforcement for the benefit of all"clean" Athletes and fairness in theexceptional circumstance where aProhibited Substance entered anAthlete’s system through No Faultor Negligence or No Significant Faultor Negligence on the Athlete’s part.It is important to emphasize thatwhile the determination of whetherthe anti-doping rule violation hasoccurred is based on strict liability,the imposition of a fixed period ofIneligibility is not automatic. |
Thestrict liability principle set forth inthe Code has been consistentlyupheld in the decisions of CAS. |
]20 World Anti-Doping Code •20092.1.2 Sufficient proof of an anti-doping rule violationunder Article 2.1 is established by either of thefollowing: presence of a Prohibited Substanceor its Metabolite s or Marker s in the Athlete ’s ASample where the Athlete waives analysis ofthe B Sample and the B Sample is notanalyzed; or, where the Athlete ’s B Sample isanalyzed and the analysis of the Athlete ’s BSample confirms the presence of theProhibited Substance or its Metabolite s orMarker s found in the Athlete ’s A Sample .2.1.3 Excepting those substances for which aquantitative threshold is specifically identifiedin the Prohibited List , the presence of anyquantity of a Prohibited Substance or itsMetabolite s or Marker s in an Athlete ’s Sampleshall constitute an anti-doping rule violation.2.1.4 As an exception to the general rule of Article2.1, the Prohibited List or InternationalStandard s may establish special criteria forthe evaluation of Prohibited Substance s thatcan also be produced endogenously. |
[Comment to Article 2.1.2: The Anti-Doping Organization with resultsmanagement responsibility may inits discretion choose to have theB Sample analyzed even if theAthlete does not request theanalysis of the B Sample. |
]Doping Control1PARTArticle 2: Anti-Doping Rule Violations21 World Anti-Doping Code •20092.2 Use or Attempt ed Use by an Athlete of aProhibited Substance or a Prohibited Method2.2.1 It is each Athlete ’s personal duty to ensure thatno Prohibited Substance enters his or her body.Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent,fault, negligence or knowing Use on theAthlete ’s part be demonstrated in order toestablish an anti-doping rule violation for Useof a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method . |
[Comment to Article 2.2: It has alwaysbeen the case that Use or AttemptedUse of a Prohibited Substance orProhibited Method may beestablished by any reliable means.As noted in the Comment to Article3.2 (Methods of Establishing Factsand Presumptions), unlike the proofrequired to establish an anti-dopingrule violation under Article 2.1,Use or Attempted Use may also beestablished by other reliable meanssuch as admissions by the Athlete,witness statements, documentaryevidence, conclusions drawn fromlongitudinal profiling, or otheranalytical information whichdoes not otherwise satisfy all therequirements to establish “Presence”of a Prohibited Substance underArticle 2.1. |
For example, Use may beestablished based upon reliableanalytical data from the analysis of anA Sample (without confirmation froman analysis of a B Sample) or fromthe analysis of a B Sample alonewhere the Anti-Doping Organizationprovides a satisfactory explanationfor the lack of confirmation inthe other Sample. |
]22 World Anti-Doping Code •20092.2.2 The success or failure of the Use or Attempt edUse of a Prohibited Substance or ProhibitedMethod is not material. |
It is sufficient that theProhibited Substance or Prohibited Methodwas Used or Attempt ed to be Used for an anti-doping rule violation to be committed.2.3 Refusing or failing without compelling justificationto submit to Sample collection after notification asauthorized in applicable anti-doping rules, orotherwise evading Sample collection[Comment to Article 2.3: Failure orrefusal to submit to Sample collectionafter notification was prohibited inalmost all pre-Code anti-dopingrules. |
This Article expands the typicalpre-Code rule to include "otherwiseevading Sample collection" asprohibited conduct. |
Thus, forexample, it would be an anti-dopingrule violation if it were establishedthat an Athlete was hiding froma Doping Control official to evadenotification or Testing. |
A violationof "refusing or failing to submit toSample collection” may be basedon either intentional or negligentconduct of the Athlete, while"evading" Sample collectioncontemplates intentionalconduct by the Athlete. |
]Doping Control1PARTArticle 2: Anti-Doping Rule Violations[Comment to Article 2.2.2: Demon-strating the "Attempted Use" of aProhibited Substance requires proofof intent on the Athlete’s part. |
The factthat intent may be required to provethis particular anti-doping rule violationdoes not undermine the strict liabilityprinciple established for violations ofArticle 2.1 and violations of Article 2.2in respect of Use of a ProhibitedSubstance or Prohibited Method. |
An Athlete’s Use of a ProhibitedSubstance constitutes an anti-dopingrule violation unless such substanceis not prohibited Out-of-Competitionand the Athlete’s Use takes placeOut-of-Competition. |
(However, thepresence of a Prohibited Substanceor its Metabolites or Markers in aSample collected In-Competition is aviolation of Article 2.1 (Presence of aProhibited Substance or its Metabolitesor Markers) regardless of whenthat substance might havebeen administered. |
)]23 World Anti-Doping Code •20092.4 Violation of applicable requirements regarding Athleteavailability for Out-of-Competition Testing , includingfailure to file required whereabouts information andmissed tests which are declared based on rules whichcomply with the International Standard for Testing. |
Anycombination of three missed tests and/or filing failureswithin an eighteen-month period as determined byAnti-Doping Organization s with jurisdiction over theAthlete shall constitute an anti-doping rule violation2.5 Tampering orAttempt ed Tampering with any partof Doping Control[Comment to Article 2.5: This Articleprohibits conduct which subverts theDoping Control process but whichwould not otherwise be included inthe definition of Prohibited Methods.For example, altering identificationnumbers on a Doping Control formduring Testing, breaking the B Bottleat the time of B Sample analysis orproviding fraudulent information toan Anti-Doping Organization. |
][Comment to Article 2.4: Separatewhereabouts filing failures andmissed tests declared under therules of the Athlete’s InternationalFederation or any other Anti-DopingOrganization with authority to declarewhereabouts filing failures andmissed tests in accordance with theInternational Standard for Testingshall be combined in applying thisArticle. |
In appropriate circumstances,missed tests or filing failures may alsoconstitute an anti-doping rule violationunder Article 2.3 or Article 2.5. |
]24 World Anti-Doping Code •20092.6 Possession of Prohibited Substance sand Prohibited Method s2.6.1 Possession by an Athlete In-Competition of anyProhibited Method or any ProhibitedSubstance, or Possession by an Athlete Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Method or anyProhibited Substance which is prohibited Out-of-Competition unless the Athlete establishesthat the Possession is pursuant to atherapeutic use exemption granted inaccordance with Article 4.4 (Therapeutic Use)or other acceptable justification.2.6.2Possession by an Athlete Support PersonnelIn-Competition of any Prohibited Method orany Prohibited Substance, or Possession by anAthlete Support Personnel Out-of-Competitionof any Prohibited Method or any ProhibitedSubstance which is prohibited Out-of-Competition in connection with an Athlete ,Competition or training, unless the AthleteSupport Personnel establishes that thePossession is pursuant to a therapeutic useexemption granted to an Athlete in accordancewith Article 4.4 (Therapeutic Use) or otheracceptable justification.Doping Control1PARTArticle 2: Anti-Doping Rule Violations[Comment to Article 2.6.1 and 2.6.2:Acceptable justification would notinclude, for example, buying orPossessing a Prohibited Substancefor purposes of giving it to a friend orrelative, except under justifiablemedical circumstances wherethat Person had a physician’sprescription, e.g., buying Insulinfor a diabetic child. |
][Comment to Article 2.6.2: Acceptable justification wouldinclude, for example, a teamdoctor carrying ProhibitedSubstances for dealing with acuteand emergency situations. |
]25 World Anti-Doping Code •20092.7 Trafficking or Attempt edTrafficking in anyProhibited Substance orProhibited Method2.8 Administration or Attempt ed administration to anyAthlete In-Competition of any Prohibited Method orProhibited Substance, or administration or Attempt edadministration to any Athlete Out-of-Competition ofany Prohibited Method or any Prohibited Substancethat is prohibited Out-of-Competition , or assisting,encouraging, aiding, abetting, covering up or anyother type of complicity involving an anti-doping ruleviolation or any Attempt ed anti-doping rule violation[Comment ‘b’ to Article 2: The Codedoes not make it an anti-dopingrule violation for an Athlete or otherPerson to work or associate withAthlete Support Personnel who areserving a period of Ineligibility.However, a sport organizationmay adopt its own rules whichprohibit such conduct. |
]26 World Anti-Doping Code •2009ARTICLE 3: PROOF OF DOPING3.1 Burdens and Standards of ProofThe Anti-Doping Organization shall have the burden ofestablishing that an anti-doping rule violation hasoccurred. |
The standard of proof shall be whether theAnti-Doping Organization has established an anti-doping rule violation to the comfortable satisfaction ofthe hearing panel bearing in mind the seriousness ofthe allegation which is made. |
This standard of proof inall cases is greater than a mere balance of probabilitybut less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. |
Wherethe Code places the burden of proof upon the Athlete orother Person alleged to have committed an anti-dopingrule violation to rebut a presumption or establishspecified facts or circumstances, the standard of proofshall be by a balance of probability, except as providedin Articles 10.4 and 10.6 where the Athlete must satisfya higher burden of proof.3.2 Methods of Establishing Facts and PresumptionsFacts related to anti-doping rule violations may beestablished by any reliable means, includingadmissions. |
The following rules of proof shall beapplicable in doping cases:Doping Control1PARTArticle 3: Proof of Doping[Comment to Article 3.2: For example,an Anti-Doping Organization mayestablish an anti-doping rule violationunder Article 2.2 (Use or AttemptedUse of a Prohibited Substance orProhibited Method) based on theAthlete’s admissions, the credibletestimony of third Persons, reliabledocumentary evidence, reliableanalytical data from either an A or BSample as provided in the Commentsto Article 2.2, or conclusions drawnfrom the profile of a series of theAthlete’s blood or urine Samples. |
][Comment to Article 3.1: This standardof proof required to be met by the Anti-Doping Organization is comparable tothe standard which is applied in mostcountries to cases involvingprofessional misconduct. |
It has also been widely applied bycourts and hearing panels in dopingcases. |
See, for example, the CASdecision in N., J., Y., W. v. FINA, CAS98/208, 22 December 1998. |
]27 World Anti-Doping Code •20093.2.1 WADA -accredited laboratories are presumedto have conducted Sample analysis andcustodial procedures in accordance with theInternational Standard for Laboratories. |
TheAthlete or other Person may rebut thispresumption by establishing that a departurefrom the International Standard forLaboratories occurred which could reasonablyhave caused the Adverse Analytical Finding . |
If the Athlete or other Person rebuts thepreceding presumption by showing that adeparture from the International Standard forLaboratories occurred which could reasonablyhave caused the Adverse Analytical Finding ,then the Anti-Doping Organization shall havethe burden to establish that such departure didnot cause the Adverse Analytical Finding .3.2.2 Departures from any other InternationalStandard or other anti-doping rule or policywhich did not cause an Adverse AnalyticalFinding or other anti-doping rule violation shallnot invalidate such results. |
If the Athlete orother Person establishes that a departure fromanother International Standard or other anti-doping rule or policy which could reasonablyhave caused the Adverse Analytical Finding or[Comment to Article 3.2.1: The burdenis on the Athlete or other Person toestablish, by a balance of probability,a departure from the InternationalStandard for Laboratories that couldreasonably have caused the AdverseAnalytical Finding. |
If the Athlete orother Person does so, the burdenshifts to the Anti-Doping Organizationto prove to the comfortable satisfactionof the hearing panel that the departuredid not cause the AdverseAnalytical Finding. |
]28 World Anti-Doping Code •2009other anti-doping rule violation occurred, thenthe Anti-Doping Organization shall have theburden to establish that such departure did notcause the Adverse Analytical Finding or thefactual basis for the anti-doping rule violation.3.2.3 The facts established by a decision of a court orprofessional disciplinary tribunal of competentjurisdiction which is not the subject of apending appeal shall be irrebuttable evidenceagainst the Athlete or other Person to whomthe decision pertained of those facts unless theAthlete or other Person establishes that thedecision violated principles of natural justice.3.2.4 The hearing panel in a hearing on an anti-doping rule violation may draw an inferenceadverse to the Athlete or other Person who isasserted to have committed an anti-dopingrule violation based on the Athlete ’s or otherPerson ’s refusal, after a request made in areasonable time in advance of the hearing, toappear at the hearing (either in person ortelephonically as directed by the hearing panel)and to answer questions from the hearingpanel or the Anti-Doping Organization assertingthe anti-doping rule violation. |
[Comment to Article 3.2.4: Drawingan adverse inference under thesecircumstances has been recognizedin numerous CAS decisions. |
]Doping Control1PARTArticle 3: Proof of DopingArticle 4: The Prohibited List29 World Anti-Doping Code •2009ARTICLE 4: THE PROHIBITED LIST4.1 Publication and Revision of the Prohibited ListWADA shall, as often as necessary and no less oftenthan annually, publish the Prohibited List as anInternational Standard . |
The proposed content of theProhibited List and all revisions shall be provided inwriting promptly to all Signatories and governmentsfor comment and consultation. |
Each annual versionof the Prohibited List and all revisions shall bedistributed promptly by WADA to each Signatory andgovernment and shall be published on WADA 's Website, and each Signatory shall take appropriate stepsto distribute the Prohibited List to its members andconstituents. |
The rules of each Anti-DopingOrganization shall specify that, unless providedotherwise in the Prohibited List or a revision, theProhibited List and revisions shall go into effectunder the Anti-Doping Organization 's rules three (3)months after publication of the Prohibited List byWADA without requiring any further action by theAnti-Doping Organization. |
[Comment to Article 4.1: TheProhibited List will be revised andpublished on an expedited basiswhenever the need arises. |
However,for the sake of predictability, a newProhibited List will be publishedevery year whether or not changeshave been made. |
WADA will alwayshave the most current ProhibitedList published on its Web site. |
TheProhibited List is an integral part ofthe International Convention againstDoping in Sport. |
WADA will informthe Director-General of UNESCO ofany change to the Prohibited List. |
]30 World Anti-Doping Code •20094.2 Prohibited Substance s and Prohibited Method sIdentified on the Prohibited List4.2.1 Prohibited Substance s and Prohibited Method sThe Prohibited List shall identify thoseProhibited Substance s and Prohibited Method swhich are prohibited as doping at all times(both In-Competition and Out-of-Competition )because of their potential to enhanceperformance in future Competition s or theirmasking potential and those substances andmethods which are prohibited In-Competitiononly. |
The Prohibited List may be expanded byWADA for a particular sport. |
ProhibitedSubstance s and Prohibited Method s may beincluded in the Prohibited List by generalcategory (e.g., anabolic agents) or by specificreference to a particular substance or method. |
Doping Control1PARTArticle 4: The Prohibited List[Comment to Article 4.2.1: Therewill be one Prohibited List. |
Thesubstances which are prohibited atall times would include maskingagents and those substances which,when Used in training, may havelong-term performance enhancingeffects such as anabolics. |
Allsubstances and methods on theProhibited List are prohibited In-Competition. |
Out-of-Competition Use(Article 2.2) of a substance which isonly prohibited In-Competition is notan anti-doping rule violation unlessan Adverse Analytical Finding forthe substance or its Metabolites isreported for a Sample collectedIn-Competition (Article 2.1).There will be only one documentcalled the "Prohibited List." |
WADAmay add additional substances ormethods to the Prohibited List forparticular sports (e.g. |
the inclusionof beta-blockers for shooting) but thiswill also be reflected on the singleProhibited List. |
A particular sport isnot permitted to seek exemptionfrom the basic list of ProhibitedSubstances (e.g. |
eliminatinganabolics from the Prohibited Listfor ''mind sports"). |
The premise ofthis decision is that there are certainbasic doping agents which anyonewho chooses to call himself orherself an Athlete should not take. |
]31 World Anti-Doping Code •20094.2.2 Specified SubstancesFor purposes of the application of Article 10(Sanctions on Individuals), all ProhibitedSubstance s shall be “Specified Substances”except substances in the classes of anabolicagents and hormones and those stimulantsand hormone antagonists and modulators soidentified on the Prohibited List . |
ProhibitedMethod s shall not be Specified Substances.4.2.3 New Classes of Prohibited Substance sIn the event WADA expands the Prohibited List byadding a new class of Prohibited Substance sinaccordance with Article 4.1, WADA ’s ExecutiveCommittee shall determine whether any or allProhibited Substance s within the new class ofProhibited Substance s shall be consideredSpecified Substances under Article 4.2.2. |
[Comment to Article 4.2.2: In draftingthe Code there was considerabledebate among stakeholders over theappropriate balance betweeninflexible sanctions which promoteharmonization in the application ofthe rules and more flexible sanctionswhich better take into considerationthe circumstances of each individualcase. |
This balance continued to bediscussed in various CAS decisionsinterpreting the Code. |
After threeyears experience with the Code, thestrong consensus of stakeholders isthat while the occurrence of an anti-doping rule violation under Articles2.1 (Presence of a ProhibitedSubstance or its Metabolites orMarkers) and 2.2 (Use of a ProhibitedSubstance or Prohibited Method)should still be based on the principleof strict liability, the Code sanctionsshould be made more flexible wherethe Athlete or other Person canclearly demonstrate that he or shedid not intend to enhance sportperformance. |
The change to Article4.2 and related changes to Article 10provide this additional flexibility forviolations involving many ProhibitedSubstances. |
The rules set forth inArticle 10.5 (Elimination or Reductionof Period of Ineligibility Based onExceptional Circumstances) wouldremain the only basis for eliminatingor reducing a sanction involvinganabolic steroids and hormones,as well as the stimulants and thehormone antagonists and modulatorsso identified on the Prohibited List,or Prohibited Methods. |
]32 World Anti-Doping Code •20094.3 Criteria for Including Substancesand Methods on the Prohibited ListWADA shall consider the following criteria in decidingwhether to include a substance or method on theProhibited List .4.3.1 A substance or method shall be considered forinclusion on the Prohibited List if WADAdetermines that the substance or methodmeets any two of the following three criteria:4.3.1.1 Medical or other scientific evidence,pharmacological effect or experiencethat the substance or method, alone orin combination with other substancesor methods, has the potential toenhance or enhances sport performance;4.3.1.2 Medical or other scientific evidence,pharmacological effect or experiencethat the Use of the substance ormethod represents an actual orpotential health risk to the Athlete ; Doping Control1PARTArticle 4: The Prohibited List[Comment to Article 4.3.1.1: ThisArticle anticipates that there may besubstances that, when used alone,are not prohibited but which will beprohibited if used in combination withcertain other substances. |
Asubstance which is added to theProhibited List because it has thepotential to enhance performanceonly in combination with anothersubstance shall be so noted andshall be prohibited only if thereis evidence relating to bothsubstances in combination. |
]33 World Anti-Doping Code •20094.3.1.3 WADA 's determination that the Use ofthe substance or method violates thespirit of sport described in theIntroduction to the Code .4.3.2 A substance or method shall also be included onthe Prohibited List if WADA determines there ismedical or other scientific evidence, pharma-cological effect or experience that the substanceor method has the potential to mask the Use ofother Prohibited Substance s or Prohibited Method s.[Comment to Article 4.3.2: A substance shall be considered forinclusion on the Prohibited List ifthe substance is a masking agentor meets two of the following threecriteria: (1) it has the potentialto enhance or enhances sportperformance; (2) it represents apotential or actual health risk; or (3)it is contrary to the spirit of sport.None of the three criteria aloneis a sufficient basis for adding asubstance to the Prohibited List.Using the potential to enhanceperformance as the sole criterionwould include, for example, physicaland mental training, red meat,carbohydrate loading and training ataltitude. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.