Datasets:
timotheeplanes
/
doping

Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
 Community
1
text
stringlengths
1
17.8k
Risk of harm would includesmoking.
Requiring all three criteriawould also be unsatisfactory.For example, the Use of genetictransfer technology to dramaticallyenhance sport performance shouldbe prohibited as contrary to the spiritof sport even if it is not harmful.Similarly, the potentially unhealthyabuse of certain substances withouttherapeutic justification based onthe mistaken belief they enhanceperformance is certainly contraryto the spirit of sport regardlessof whether the expectation ofperformance enhancement isrealistic.
As part of the process eachyear, all Signatories, governmentsand other interested Persons areinvited to provide comments to WADAon the content of the Prohibited List.
]34 World Anti-Doping Code •20094.3.3 WADA ’s determination of the ProhibitedSubstance s and Prohibited Method s that will beincluded on the Prohibited List and the classi-fication of substances into categories on theProhibited List is final and shall not be subject tochallenge by an Athlete or other Person based onan argument that the substance or method wasnot a masking agent or did not have the potentialto enhance performance, represent a health riskor violate the spirit of sport.4.4 Therapeutic UseWADA has adopted an International Standard for theprocess of granting therapeutic use exemptions.
Each International Federation shall ensure, forInternational-Level Athlete s or any other Athlete who isentered in an International Event , that a process is inplace whereby Athlete s with documented medicalconditions requiring the Use of a Prohibited Substanceor a Prohibited Method may request a therapeutic useexemption.
Athlete s who have been identified asincluded in their International Federation’s RegisteredTesting Pool may only obtain therapeutic useexemptions in accordance with the rules of theirInternational Federation.
Each International Federationshall publish a list of those International Event s forwhich a therapeutic use exemption from theInternational Federation is required.
Each NationalAnti-Doping Organization shall ensure, for all Athlete sDoping Control1PARTArticle 4: The Prohibited List[Comment to Article 4.3.3: Thequestion of whether a substancemeets the criteria in Article 4.3(Criteria for Including Substances andMethods on the Prohibited List) in aparticular case cannot be raised asa defense to an anti-doping ruleviolation.
For example, it cannot beargued that the Prohibited Substancedetected would not have beenperformance enhancing in thatparticular sport.
Rather, dopingoccurs when a substance on theProhibited List is found in anAthlete’s Sample.
Similarly, it cannotbe argued that a substance listedin the class of anabolic agents doesnot belong in that class.
]35 World Anti-Doping Code •2009within its jurisdiction that have not been included in anInternational Federation Registered Testing Pool , thata process is in place whereby Athlete s withdocumented medical conditions requiring the Use of aProhibited Substance or a Prohibited Method mayrequest a therapeutic use exemption.
Such requestsshall be evaluated in accordance with the InternationalStandard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions.International Federations and National Anti-DopingOrganization s shall promptly report to WADA throughADAMS the granting of any therapeutic use exemptionexcept as regards national-level Athlete s who are notincluded in the National Anti-Doping Organization 'sRegistered Testing Pool .WADA , on its own initiative, may review at any time thegranting of a therapeutic use exemption to anyInternational-Level Athlete or national-level Athletewho is included in his or her National Anti-DopingOrganization 's Registered Testing Pool .
Further, uponthe request of any such Athlete who has been denied atherapeutic use exemption, WADA may review suchdenial.
If WADA determines that such granting ordenial of a therapeutic use exemption did not complywith the International Standard for Therapeutic UseExemptions, WADA may reverse the decision.If, contrary to the requirement of this Article, anInternational Federation does not have a process in placewhere Athlete s may request therapeutic useexemptions, an International-Level Athlete may requestWADA to review the application as if it had been denied.Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolite sor Marker s (Article 2.1), Use or Attempt edUse of aProhibited Substance or a Prohibited Method (Article2.2), Possession of Prohibited Substance s andProhibited Method s (Article 2.6) or Administration orAttempt ed Administration of a Prohibited Substance or36 World Anti-Doping Code •2009Prohibited Method (Article 2.8) consistent with theprovisions of an applicable therapeutic use exemptionissued pursuant to the International Standard forTherapeutic Use Exemptions shall not be consideredan anti-doping rule violation.4.5 Monitoring ProgramWADA , in consultation with Signatories andgovernments, shall establish a monitoring programregarding substances which are not on the ProhibitedList, but which WADA wishes to monitor in order todetect patterns of misuse in sport.
WADA shall publish,in advance of any Testing , the substances that will bemonitored.
Laboratories will report the instances ofreported Useor detected presence of these substancesto WADA periodically on an aggregate basis by sportand whether the Sample s were collected In-Competition or Out–of-Competition .
Such reports shallnot contain additional information regarding specificSample s. WADA shall make available to InternationalFederations and National Anti-Doping Organization s,on at least an annual basis, aggregate statisticalinformation by sport regarding the additionalsubstances.
WADA shall implement measures toensure that strict anonymity of individual Athlete si smaintained with respect to such reports.
The reportedUse or detected presence of a monitored substanceshall not constitute an anti-doping rule violation.Doping Control1PARTArticle 4: The Prohibited ListArticle 5: Testing37 World Anti-Doping Code •2009ARTICLE 5: TESTING5.1 Test Distribution Planning Subject to the jurisdictional limitations for In-Competition Testing in Article 15.1, each National Anti-Doping Organization shall have Testing jurisdiction overall Athlete s who are present in that National Anti-DopingOrganization ’s country or who are nationals, residents,license-holders or members of sport organizations ofthat country.
Each International Federation shall haveTesting jurisdiction over all Athlete s who are membersof their member National Federations or who participatein their Event s. All Athlete s must comply with anyrequest for Testing by any Anti-Doping Organization withTesting jurisdiction.
In coordination with other Anti-Doping Organization s conducting Testing on the sameAthlete s, and consistent with the International Standardfor Testing, each Anti-Doping Organization shall:5.1.1 Plan and conduct an effective number of In-Competition and Out-of-Competition tests onAthlete s over whom they have jurisdiction,including but not limited to Athlete s in theirrespective Registered Testing Pool s. EachInternational Federation shall establish aRegistered Testing Pool for International-LevelAthlete s in its sport, and each National Anti-Doping Organization shall establish a nationalRegistered Testing Pool for Athlete s who arepresent in that National Anti-DopingOrganization ’s country or who are nationals,residents, license-holders or members of sportorganizations of that country.
In accordancewith Article 14.3, any Athlete included in aRegistered Testing Pool shall be subject to thewhereabouts requirements set out in theInternational Standard for Testing .
38 World Anti-Doping Code •20095.1.2 Except in exc eptional circumstances all Out-of-Competition Testing shall be No Advance Notice .5.1.3 Make Target Testing a priority.5.1.4 Conduct Testing on Athlete s serving a period ofIneligibility or a Provisional Suspension.5.2 Standards for TestingAnti-Doping Organization s with Testing jurisdictionshall conduct such Testing in conformity with theInternational Standard for Testing .5.3 Retired Athlete s Returning to CompetitionEach Anti-Doping Organization shall establish a ruleaddressing eligibility requirements for Athlete s whoare not Ineligible and retire from sport while includedin a Registered Testing Pool and then seek to returnto active participation in sport .Doping Control1PARTArticle 5: TestingArticle 6: Analysis of Samples[Comment to Article 5.1.3: TargetTesting is specified because randomTesting, or even weighted randomTesting, does not ensure that all of theappropriate Athletes will be tested (e.g.,world-class Athletes, Athletes whoseperformances have dramaticallyimproved over a short period of time,Athletes whose coaches have had otherAthletes test positive, etc.).
Obviously, Target Testing must not beused for any purpose other thanlegitimate Doping Control.
The Codemakes it clear that Athletes have noright to expect that they will be testedonly on a random basis.
Similarly,it does not impose any reasonablesuspicion or probable causerequirement for Target Testing.
]39 World Anti-Doping Code •2009ARTICLE 6: ANAL YSIS OF SAMPLE SSample s shall be analyzed in accordance with thefollowing principles:6.1 Use of Approved LaboratoriesFor purposes of Article 2.1 (Presence of a ProhibitedSubstance or its Metabolite s or Marker s),Sample s shallbe analyzed only in WADA -accredited laboratories or asotherwise approved by WADA .
The choice of the WADA -accredited laboratory (or other laboratory or methodapproved by WADA ) used for the Sample analysis shallbe determined exclusively by the Anti-DopingOrganization responsible for results management.6.2 Purpose of Collection and Analysis of Sample sSample s shall be analyzed to detect ProhibitedSubstance s and Prohibited Method s identified on theProhibited List and other substances as may bedirected by WADA pursuant to Article 4.5 (MonitoringProgram), or to assist an Anti-Doping Organization inprofiling relevant parameters in an Athlete ’s urine,blood or other matrix, including DNA or genomicprofiling, for anti-doping purposes.
[Comment to Article 6.1: Violations ofArticle 2.1 (Presence of a ProhibitedSubstance or its Metabolites orMarkers) may be established only bySample analysis performed by aWADA-approved laboratory oranother laboratory specificallyauthorized by WADA.
Violations ofother Articles may be establishedusing analytical results from otherlaboratories so long as the resultsare reliable.
][Comment to Article 6.2: For example,relevant profile information could beused to direct Target Testing or tosupport an anti-doping rule violationproceeding under Article 2.2 (Useor Attempted Use of a ProhibitedSubstance), or both.
]40 World Anti-Doping Code •20096.3 Research on Sample s No Sample may be used for any purpose other thanas described in Article 6.2 without the Athlete 'swritten consent.
Sample s used for purposes otherthan Article 6.2 shall have any means of identi-fication removed such that they cannot be tracedback to a particular Athlete .6.4 Standards for Sample Analysis and ReportingLaboratories shall analyze Doping Control Sample sand report results in conformity with theInternational Standard for Laboratories.6.5 Retesting Sample sA Sample may be reanalyzed for the purpose of Article6.2 at any time exclusively at the direction of the Anti-Doping Organization that collected the Sample orWADA.
The circumstances and conditions for retestingSample s shall conform with the requirements of theInternational Standard for Laboratories.Doping Control1PARTArticle 6: Analysis of SamplesArticle 7: Results Management[Comment to Article 6.5: Althoughthis Article is new, Anti-DopingOrganizations have always had theauthority to reanalyze Samples.The International Standard forLaboratories or a new technicaldocument which is made a partof the International Standard willharmonize the protocol forsuch retesting.
]41 World Anti-Doping Code •2009ARTICLE 7: RESULTS MANAGEMENTEach Anti-Doping Organization conducting resultsmanagement shall establish a process for the pre-hearingadministration of potential anti-doping rule violations thatrespects the following principles:7.1 Initial Review Regarding Adverse Analytical Finding sUpon receipt of an A Sample Adverse AnalyticalFinding , the Anti-Doping Organization responsible forresults management shall conduct a review todetermine whether: (a) an applicable therapeutic useexemption has been granted or will be granted asprovided in the International Standard forTherapeutic Use Exemptions, or (b) there is anyapparent departure from the International Standardfor Testing or International Standard for Laboratoriesthat caused the Adverse Analytical Finding .
7.2 Notification After Initial Review RegardingAdverse Analytical Finding sIf the initial review of an Adverse Analytical Findingunder Article 7.1 does not reveal an applicabletherapeutic use exemption or entitlement to atherapeutic use exemption as provided in theInternational Standard for Therapeutic UseExemptions, or departure that caused the Adverse[Comment to Article 7: VariousSignatories have created their ownapproaches to results management.While the various approaches havenot been entirely uniform, many haveproven to be fair and effectivesystems for results management.The Code does not supplant each ofthe Signatories' results managementsystems.
This Article does, however,specify basic principles in order toensure the fundamental fairness ofthe results management processwhich must be observed by eachSignatory.
The specific anti-dopingrules of each Signatory shall beconsistent with these basic principles.
]42 World Anti-Doping Code •2009Analytical Finding , the Anti-Doping Organizationshall promptly notify the Athlete , in the manner setout in its rules, of: (a) the Adverse Analytical Finding ;(b) the anti-doping rule violated; (c) the Athlete 's rightto promptly request the analysis of the B Sample or,failing such request, that the B Sample analysis maybe deemed waived; (d) the scheduled date, time andplace for the B Sample analysis if the Athlete or Anti-Doping Organization chooses to request an analysisof the B Sample ; (e) the opportunity for the Athleteand/or the Athlete 's representative to attend the BSample opening and analysis within the time periodspecified in the International Standard forLaboratories if such analysis is requested; and (f) theAthlete 's right to request copies of the A and BSample laboratory documentation package whichincludes information as required by the InternationalStandard for Laboratories.
The Anti-Doping Organizationshall also notify the other Anti-Doping Organization sdescribed in Article 14.1.2.
If the Anti-DopingOrganization decides not to bring forward theAdverse Analytical Finding as an anti-doping ruleviolation, it shall so notify the Athlete and the Anti-Doping Organization s as described in Article 14.1.2.7.3 Review of Atypical Finding sAs provided in the International Standard s, in somecircumstances laboratories are directed to report thepresence of Prohibited Substance s, which may alsobe produced endogenously, as Atypical Finding ssubject to further investigation.
Upon receipt of an ASample Atypical Finding , the Anti-DopingOrganization responsible for results managementDoping Control1PARTArticle 7: Results Management43 World Anti-Doping Code •2009shall conduct a review to determine whether: (a) anapplicable therapeutic use exemption has beengranted, or (b) there is any apparent departure fromthe International Standard for Testing orInternational Standard for Laboratories that causedthe Atypical Finding.
If that review does not reveal anapplicable therapeutic use exemption or departurethat caused the Atypical Finding , the Anti-DopingOrganization shall conduct the required investigation.After the investigation is completed, the Athlete andother Anti-Doping Organization s identified in Article14.1.2 shall be notified whether or not the AtypicalFinding will be brought forward as an AdverseAnalytical Finding .
The Athlete shall be notified asprovided in Article 7.2.
7.3.1 The Anti-Doping Organization will not providenotice of an Atypical Finding until it hascompleted its investigation and decided whetherit will bring the Atypical Finding forward as anAdverse Analytical Finding unless one of thefollowing circumstances exist:(a) If the Anti-Doping Organization determinesthe B Sample should be analyzed prior tothe conclusion of its investigation underArticle 7.3, the Anti-Doping Organizationmay conduct the B Sample analysis afternotifying the Athlete , with such notice toinclude a description of the AtypicalFinding and the information described inArticle 7.2(b)-(f).44 World Anti-Doping Code •2009(b) If the Anti-Doping Organization receives a request, either from a Major EventOrganization shortly before one of itsInternational Event s or a request from asport organization responsible for meetingan imminent deadline for selecting teammembers for an International Event , todisclose whether any Athlete identified ona list provided by the Major EventOrganization or sport organization has apending Atypical Finding , the Anti-DopingOrganization shall so identify any suchAthlete after first providing notice of theAtypical Finding to the Athlete.7.4 Review of Other Anti-Doping Rule Violations Not Covered by Articles 7.1–7.3The Anti-Doping Organization or other reviewing bodyestablished by such organization shall conduct anyfollow-up investigation into a possible anti-dopingrule violation as may be required under applicableanti-doping policies and rules adopted pursuant tothe Code or which the Anti-Doping Organizationotherwise considers appropriate.
At such time as theAnti-Doping Organization is satisfied that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred, it shall promptlygive the Athlete or other Person subject to sanctionnotice, in the manner set out in its rules, of the anti-doping rule violated, and the basis of the violation.Other Anti-Doping Organization s shall be notified asprovided in Article 14.1.2.Doping Control1PARTArticle 7: Results Management[Comment to Article 7.4: As an example,an International Federation typicallywould notify the Athlete through theAthlete's national sports federation.
][Comment to Article 7.3.1(b): Underthe circumstance described in Article7.3.1(b), the option to take actionwould be left to the Major EventOrganization or sport organizationconsistent with its rules.
]45 World Anti-Doping Code •20097.5 Principles Applicable to Provisional Suspension s7.5.1 Mandatory Provisional Suspensionafter A Sample Adverse Analytical FindingSignatories shall adopt rules, applicable to anyEvent for which the Signatory is the ruling bodyor for any team selection process for which theSignatory is responsible or where the Signatoryis the applicable International Federation orhas results management authority over thealleged anti-doping rule violation, providingthat when an A Sample Adverse AnalyticalFinding is received for a Prohibited Substance,other than a Specified Substance ,a ProvisionalSuspension shall be imposed promptly afterthe review and notification described in Articles7.1 and 7.2.Provided, however, that a Provisional Suspensionmay not be imposed unless the Athlete is giveneither: (a) an opportunity for a ProvisionalHearing either before imposition of theProvisional Suspension or on a timely basis[Comment to Article 7.5: Before aProvisional Suspension can beunilaterally imposed by an Anti-Doping Organization, the internalreview specified in the Code must firstbe completed.
In addition, a Signatoryimposing a Provisional Suspensionis required to give the Athlete anopportunity for a Provisional Hearingeither before or promptly afterthe imposition of the ProvisionalSuspension, or an expedited finalhearing under Article 8 promptlyafter imposition of the ProvisionalSuspension.
The Athlete has aright to appeal under Article 13.2.
In the rare circumstance where theB Sample analysis does not confirmthe A Sample finding, the Athletewho had been provisionally suspendedwill be allowed, where circumstancespermit, to participate in subsequentCompetitions during the Event.Similarly, depending upon the relevantrules of the International Federationin a Team Sport, if the team is still inCompetition, the Athlete may be ableto take part in future Competitions.Athletes shall receive credit for aProvisional Suspension againstany period of Ineligibility which isultimately imposed as providedin Article 10.9.3.
]46 World Anti-Doping Code •2009after imposition of the Provisional Suspension ;or (b) an opportunity for an expedited hearingin accordance with Article 8 (Right to a FairHearing) on a timely basis after imposition of aProvisional Suspension .7.5.2 Optional Provisional Suspension based on ASample Adverse Analytical Finding for SpecifiedSubstances or other anti-doping rule violationsA Signatory may adopt rules, applicable to anyEvent for which the Signatory is the ruling bodyor for any team selection process for which theSignatory is responsible or where the Signatoryis the applicable International Federation or hasresults management authority over the allegedanti-doping rule violation, permitting ProvisionalSuspension s to be imposed for anti-doping ruleviolations other than an Adverse AnalyticalFinding , or after the review and notificationdescribed in Articles 7.1 and 7.2 for SpecifiedSubstances, but prior to the analysis of theAthlete ’s B Sample or the final hearing asdescribed in Article 8 (Right to a Fair Hearing).
Provided, however, that a Provisional Suspensionmay not be imposed unless the Athlete or otherPerson is given either: (a) an opportunity for aProvisional Hearing either before imposition ofthe Provisional Suspension or on a timely basisafter imposition of the Provisional Suspension ;or (b) an opportunity for an expedited hearing inaccordance with Article 8 (Right to a FairHearing) on a timely basis after imposition of aProvisional Suspension .If a Provisional Suspension is imposed based onan A Sample Adverse Analytical Finding and aDoping Control1PARTArticle 7: Results Management47 World Anti-Doping Code •2009subsequent B Sample analysis (if requested bythe Athlete or Anti-Doping Organization ) doesnot confirm the A Sample analysis, then theAthlete shall not be subject to any furtherProvisional Suspension on account of a violationof Article 2.1 (Presence of a ProhibitedSubstance or its Metabolite s or Marker s).
Incircumstances where the Athlete (or theAthlete 's team as may be provided in the rules ofthe applicable International Federation) has beenremoved from a Competition based on a violationof Article 2.1 and the subsequent B Sampleanalysis does not confirm the A Sample finding,if, without otherwise affecting the Competition , itis still possible for the Athlete or team to bereinserted, the Athlete or team may continue totake part in the Competition .7.6 Retirement from Sport If an Athlete or other Person retires while a resultsmanagement process is underway, the Anti-DopingOrganization conducting the results managementprocess retains jurisdiction to complete its resultsmanagement process.
If an Athlete or other Personretires before any results management process hasbegun, the Anti-Doping Organization which wouldhave had results management jurisdiction over theAthlete or other Person at the time the Athlete orother Person committed an anti-doping rule violation,has jurisdiction to conduct results management.
[Comment to Article 7.6: Conduct byan Athlete or other Person before theAthlete or other Person was subject tothe jurisdiction of any Anti-DopingOrganization would not constitute ananti-doping rule violation but could bea legitimate basis for denying theAthlete or other Person membershipin a sports organization.]
48 World Anti-Doping Code •2009ARTICLE 8: RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING8.1 Fair HearingsEach Anti-Doping Organization with responsibility forresults management shall provide a hearing processfor any Person who is asserted to have committed ananti-doping rule violation.
Such hearing process shalladdress whether an anti-doping rule violation wascommitted and, if so, the appropriate Consequences .The hearing process shall respect the followingprinciples: • a timely hearing;• a fair and impartial hearing panel;• the right to be represented by counsel at thePerson 's own expense;• the right to be informed in a fair and timely manner ofthe asserted anti-doping rule violation; • the right to respond to the asserted anti-dopingrule violation and resulting Consequences ;• the right of each party to present evidence,including the right to call and question witnesses(subject to the hearing panel's discretion to accepttestimony by telephone or written submission);• the Person ’s right to an interpreter at the hearing,with the hearing panel to determine the identity, andresponsibility for the cost, of the interpreter; andDoping Control1PARTArticle 8: Right to a Fair Hearing[Comment to Article 8.1: This Articlecontains basic principles relative toensuring a fair hearing for Personsasserted to have committed anti-doping rule violations.
This Article isnot intended to supplant eachSignatory's own rules for hearingsbut rather to ensure that eachSignatory provides a hearing processconsistent with these principles.
]49 World Anti-Doping Code •2009• a timely, written, reasoned decision, specificallyincluding an explanation of the reason(s) for anyperiod of Ineligibility .8.2 Event HearingsHearings held in connection with Event s may beconducted by an expedited process as permitted bythe rules of the relevant Anti-Doping Organizationand the hearing panel.8.3 Waiver of HearingThe right to a hearing may be waived either expresslyor by the Athlete ’s or other Person ’s failure tochallenge an Anti-Doping Organization ’s assertionthat an anti-doping rule violation has occurred withinthe specific time period provided in the Anti-DopingOrganization ’s rules.
Where no hearing occurs, theAnti-Doping Organization with results managementresponsibility shall submit to the Person s describedin Article 13.2.3 a reasoned decision explaining theaction taken.
[Comment to Article 8.2: Forexample, a hearing could beexpedited on the eve of a majorEvent where the resolution of theanti-doping rule violation isnecessary to determine theAthlete's eligibility to participate inthe Event or during an Event wherethe resolution of the case will affectthe validity of the Athlete's results orcontinued participation in the Event.
]50 World Anti-Doping Code •2009ARTICLE 9: AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFICATIONOF INDIVIDUAL RESULTSAn anti-doping rule violation in Individual Sport s inconnection with an In-Competition test automatically leadsto Disqualification of the result obtained in that Competitionwith all resulting Consequences , including forfeiture of anymedals, points and prizes.
Doping Control1PARTArticle 9: Automatic Disqualification of Individual ResultsArticle 10: Sanctions on Individuals[Comment to Article 9: When anAthlete wins a gold medal with aProhibited Substance in his or hersystem, that is unfair to the otherAthletes in that Competitionregardless of whether the goldmedalist was at fault in any way.Only a "clean" Athlete should be allowed to benefit from his or her competitive results.For Team Sports, see Article 11(Consequences to Teams).In sports which are not Team Sportsbut where awards are given to teams,Disqualification or other disciplinaryaction against the team when oneor more team members havecommitted an anti-doping ruleviolation shall be as providedin the applicable rules of theInternational Federation.
]51 World Anti-Doping Code •2009ARTICLE 10: SANCTIONS ON INDIVIDUALS10.1 Disqualification of Results in the Event Duringwhich an Anti-Doping Rule Violation OccursAn anti-doping rule violation occurring during or inconnection with an Event may, upon the decision ofthe ruling body of the Event , lead to Disqualification ofall of the Athlete 's individual results obtained in thatEvent with all Consequences , including forfeiture ofall medals, points and prizes, except as provided inArticle 10.1.1.
10.1.1 If the Athlete establishes that he or she bearsNo Fault or Negligence for the violation, theAthlete 's individual results in the otherCompetition s shall not be Disqualified unlessthe Athlete 's results in Competition s otherthan the Competition in which the anti-doping rule violation occurred were likely tohave been affected by the Athlete 's anti-doping rule violation.
[Comment to Article 10.1: WhereasArticle 9 (Automatic Disqualificationof Individual Results) Disqualifiesthe result in a single Competitionin which the Athlete tested positive(e.g., the 100 meter backstroke),this Article may lead toDisqualification of all resultsin all races during the Event(e.g., the FINA WorldChampionships).
Factors to beincluded in considering whetherto Disqualify other results in anEvent might include, for example,the severity of the Athlete’s anti-doping rule violation and whetherthe Athlete tested negative inthe other Competitions.
]52 World Anti-Doping Code •200910.2 Ineligibility for Presence, Use or Attempted Use ,or Possession of Prohibited Substance sand Prohibited Method sThe period of Ineligibility imposed for a violation ofArticle 2.1 (Presence of Prohibited Substance or itsMetabolite s or Marker s), Article 2.2 ( Use orAttempt edUse of Prohibited Substance or ProhibitedMethod ) or Article 2.6 ( Possession of ProhibitedSubstance s and Prohibited Method s) shall be asfollows, unless the conditions for eliminating orreducing the period of Ineligibility , as provided inArticles 10.4 and 10.5, or the conditions for increasingthe period of Ineligibility , as provided in Article 10.6,are met: First violation : Two (2) years Ineligibility.
[Comment to Article 10.2:Harmonization of sanctions hasbeen one of the most discussedand debated areas of anti-doping.Harmonization means that thesame rules and criteria are appliedto assess the unique facts of eachcase.
Arguments against requiringharmonization of sanctions arebased on differences between sportsincluding, for example, the following:in some sports the Athletes areprofessionals making a sizableincome from the sport and in othersthe Athletes are true amateurs;in those sports where an Athlete'scareer is short (e.g., artisticgymnastics) a two-year Disqualificationhas a much more significant effect onthe Athlete than in sports wherecareers are traditionally much longer(e.g., equestrian and shooting); inIndividual Sports, the Athlete is betterable to maintain competitive skillsthrough solitary practice duringDisqualification than in other sportswhere practice as part of a team ismore important.
A primary argumentin favor of harmonization is that it issimply not right that two Athletesfrom the same country who testpositive for the same ProhibitedSubstance under similarcircumstances should receivedifferent sanctions only becausethey participate in different sports.In addition, flexibility in sanctioninghas often been viewed as anunacceptable opportunity for somesporting organizations to be morelenient with dopers.
The lack ofharmonization of sanctions hasalso frequently been the sourceof jurisdictional conflicts betweenInternational Federations andNational Anti-Doping Organizations.
]Doping Control1PARTArticle 10: Sanctions on Individuals53 World Anti-Doping Code •200910.3 Ineligibility for Other Anti-Doping Rule ViolationsThe period of Ineligibility for anti-doping ruleviolations other than as provided in Article 10.2 shallbe as follows:10.3.1 For violations of Article 2.3 (Refusing or Failingto Submit to Sample Collection) or Article 2.5(Tampering with Doping Control ), theIneligibility period shall be two (2) years unlessthe conditions provided in Article 10.5, or theconditions provided in Article 10.6, are met.10.3.2 For violations of Articles 2.7 ( Trafficking orAttempt ed Trafficking ) or 2.8 (Administrationor Attempt ed Administration of ProhibitedSubstance or Prohibited Method ), the periodof Ineligibility imposed shall be a minimum offour (4) years up to lifetime Ineligibility unlessthe conditions provided in Article 10.5 aremet.
An anti-doping rule violation involving aMinor shall be considered a particularlyserious violation and, if committed by AthleteSupport Personnel for violations other thanSpecified Substances referenced in Article4.2.2, shall result in lifetime Ineligibility forAthlete Support Personnel .
In addition,significant violations of Articles 2.7 or 2.8which may also violate non-sporting lawsand regulations, shall be reported to thecompetent administrative, professional orjudicial authorities.
[Comment to Article 10.3.2: Thosewho are involved in doping Athletesor covering up doping should besubject to sanctions which are moresevere than the Athletes who testpositive.
Since the authority of sportorganizations is generally limited toIneligibility for credentials,membership and other sportbenefits, reporting Athlete SupportPersonnel to competent authoritiesis an important step in thedeterrence of doping.
]54 World Anti-Doping Code •200910.3.3 For violations of Article 2.4 (Whereabouts FilingFailures and/or Missed Tests), the period ofIneligibility shall be at a minimum one (1) yearand at a maximum two (2) years based on theAthlete ’s degree of fault.10.4 Elimination or Reduction of the Period of Ineligibilityfor Specified Substances under Specific CircumstancesWhere an Athlete or other Person can establish howa Specified Substance entered his or her body orcame into his or her Possession and that suchSpecified Substance was not intended to enhance theAthlete ’s sport performance or mask the Use of aperformance-enhancing substance, the period ofIneligibility found in Article 10.2 shall be replaced withthe following:[Comment to Article 10.3.3: Thesanction under Article 10.3.3 shallbe two years where all three filingfailures or missed tests areinexcusable.
Otherwise, the sanctionshall be assessed in the range oftwo years to one year, based onthe circumstances of the case.
]Doping Control1PARTArticle 10: Sanctions on Individuals[Comment to Article 10.4: SpecifiedSubstances are not necessarilyless serious agents for purposes ofsports doping than other ProhibitedSubstances (for example, a stimulantthat is listed as a Specified Substancecould be very effective to an Athletein competition); for that reason,an Athlete who does not meet thecriteria under this Article wouldreceive a two-year period ofIneligibility and could receive upto a four-year period of Ineligibility under Article 10.6.
However, thereis a greater likelihood that SpecifiedSubstances, as opposed to otherProhibited Substances, couldbe susceptible to a credible,non-doping explanation.This Article applies only in thosecases where the hearing panel iscomfortably satisfied by the objectivecircumstances of the case that theAthlete in taking or Possessing aProhibited Substance did not intendto enhance his or her sport continued55 World Anti-Doping Code •2009First violation : At a minimum, a reprimand and noperiod of Ineligibility from future Event s, and at amaximum, two (2) years of Ineligibility .
To justify any elimination or reduction, the Athlete orother Person must produce corroborating evidence inaddition to his or her word which establishes to thecomfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel theabsence of an intent to enhance sport performance ormask the Use of a performance-enhancing substance.The Athlete ’s or other Person ’s degree of fault shall bethe criterion considered in assessing any reduction ofthe period of Ineligibility .performance.
Examples of the typeof objective circumstances which incombination might lead a hearingpanel to be comfortably satisfiedof no performance-enhancing intentwould include: the fact that the natureof the Specified Substance or thetiming of its ingestion would not havebeen beneficial to the Athlete; theAthlete’s open Use or disclosureof his or her Use of the SpecifiedSubstance; and a contemporaneousmedical records file substantiatingthe non sport-related prescriptionfor the Specified Substance.Generally, the greater the potentialperformance-enhancing benefit,the higher the burden on the Athleteto prove lack of an intent to enhancesport performance.
While the absence of intent toenhance sport performance mustbe established to the comfortablesatisfaction of the hearing panel,the Athlete may establish how theSpecified Substance entered thebody by a balance of probability.
In assessing the Athlete’s or otherPerson’s degree of fault, thecircumstances considered mustbe specific and relevant to explainthe Athlete’s or other Person’sdeparture from the expectedstandard of behavior.
Thus, forexample, the fact that an Athletewould lose the opportunity to earnlarge sums of money during a periodof Ineligibility or the fact that theAthlete only has a short time leftin his or her career or the timingof the sporting calendar would notbe relevant factors to be consideredin reducing the period of Ineligibilityunder this Article.
It is anticipatedthat the period of Ineligibility willbe eliminated entirely in only themost exceptional cases.
]56 World Anti-Doping Code •200910.5 Elimination or Reduction of Period of IneligibilityBased on Exceptional Circumstances10.5.1 No Fault or NegligenceIf an Athlete establishes in an individual casethat he or she bears No Fault or Negligence , theotherwise applicable period of Ineligibility shallbe eliminated.
When a Prohibited Substance orits Marker s or Metabolite s is detected in anAthlete 's Sample in violation of Article 2.1(Presence of Prohibited Substance ), the Athletemust also establish how the ProhibitedSubstance entered his or her system in order tohave the period of Ineligibility eliminated.
In theevent this Article is applied and the period ofIneligibility otherwise applicable is eliminated,the anti-doping rule violation shall not beconsidered a violation for the limited purpose ofdetermining the period of Ineligibility formultiple violations under Article 10.7.
[Comment to Articles 10.5.1 and 10.5.2:The Code provides for the possiblereduction or elimination of the periodof Ineligibility in the uniquecircumstance where the Athlete canestablish that he or she had No Faultor Negligence, or No Significant Faultor Negligence, in connection with theviolation.
This approach is consistentwith basic principles of human rightsand provides a balance between thoseAnti-Doping Organizations that arguefor a much narrower exception, ornone at all, and those that wouldreduce a two-year suspension basedon a range of other factors even whenthe Athlete was admittedly at fault.These Articles apply only to theimposition of sanctions; they arenot applicable to the determinationof whether an anti-doping ruleviolation has occurred.
Article 10.5.2 may be applied to any anti-doping ruleviolation even though it will beespecially difficult to meet the criteriafor a reduction for those anti-dopingrule violations where knowledge is anelement of the violation.Articles 10.5.1 and 10.5.2 are meantto have an impact only in cases wherethe circumstances are truly exceptionaland not in the vast majority of cases.To illustrate the operation of Article10.5.1, an example where No Fault orNegligence would result in the totalelimination of a sanction is where anAthlete could prove that, despite alldue care, he or she was sabotaged bya competitor.
Conversely, a sanctioncould not be completely eliminated onthe basis of No Fault or Negligence inthe following circumstances: (a) a continuedDoping Control1PARTArticle 10: Sanctions on Individuals57 World Anti-Doping Code •200910.5.2 No Significant Fault or NegligenceIf an Athlete or other Person establishes inan individual case that he or she bears NoSignificant Fault or Negligence, then theotherwise applicable period of Ineligibilitymay be reduced, but the reduced period ofIneligibility may not be less than one-half ofthe period of Ineligibility otherwiseapplicable.
If the otherwise applicable periodof Ineligibility is a lifetime, the reduced periodunder this Article may be no less than eight(8) years.
When a Prohibited Substance or itsMarker s or Metabolite s is detected in anAthlete 's Sample in violation of Article 2.1(Presence of a Prohibited Substance or itsMetabolite s or Marker s), the Athlete mustpositive test resulting from a mislabeledor contaminated vitamin or nutritionalsupplement (Athletes are responsiblefor what they ingest (Article 2.1.1)and have been warned againstthe possibility of supplementcontamination); (b) the administrationof a Prohibited Substance by theAthlete’s personal physician or trainerwithout disclosure to the Athlete(Athletes are responsible for theirchoice of medical personnel and foradvising medical personnel thatthey cannot be given any ProhibitedSubstance); and (c) sabotage of theAthlete’s food or drink by a spouse,coach or other Person within theAthlete’s circle of associates (Athletesare responsible for what they ingestand for the conduct of those Personsto whom they entrust access to theirfood and drink).
However, dependingon the unique facts of a particular case, any of the referencedillustrations could result in a reducedsanction based on No Significant Fault or Negligence.
(For example, reductionmay well be appropriate in illustration(a) if the Athlete clearly establishesthat the cause of the positive testwas contamination in a commonmultiple vitamin purchased froma source with no connection toProhibited Substances and theAthlete exercised care in not takingother nutritional supplements.