text stringlengths 1 17.8k |
|---|
In cases before CAS, at WADA ’s request, the CAS panel shall appoint an appropriate scientific expert to assist the panel in its evaluation of the challenge.13 11 [Comment to Article 3.1: T his standard of proof required to be met by WAKO is com parable to the standard which is applied in most countries to cases involving professional misconduct.] |
12 [Comment to Article 3.2: For example, WAKO may establish an a nti-doping rule violation under Article 2.2 based on the Athlete’s admissions, the credible testimony of third Persons, reliable documentary evidence, reliable analytical data from either an A or B Sample as provided in the Comments to Article 2.2, or conc lusions drawn from the profile o f a series of the Athlete’s blood o r urine Samples, such as data from the Athlete Biological Passport.] |
13 [Comment to Article 3.2.1: For certain Prohibited Substances, WADA may instruct WADA -accredited laboratories not to report Samples as an Adverse Ana lytical Finding if the estimated co ncentration of the Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers is below a Minimum Reporting Level. |
WADA’s decision in determining that Minimum Reporting Level or in determining which Prohibited Substances should be subject to Minimum Reporting Level s shall not be subject to challenge. |
Further, the laboratory’s estimated concentration of such Prohibited Substance in a Sample may only be an estimate. |
In no event shall the possibility th at the exact concentration of th e Prohibited Substance in the Sampl e may be below the Minimum Reporting Level constitute a defense to an anti -doping rule violation based on the presence of that Prohibited Substance in the Sample.] |
WAKO Anti-Doping Rules Page 12 of 81 3.2.2 WADA -accredi ted laboratories, and other laboratories approved by WADA , are presumed to have conducted Sample analysis and custodial procedures in accordance with the International Standard for Laboratories. |
The Athlete or other Person may rebut this presumption by est ablishing that a departure from the International Standard for Laborator ies occurred which could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding . |
If the Athlete or other Person rebuts the preceding presumption by showing that a departure from the International Standard for Laboratories occurred which could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding , then WAKO shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding .14 3.2.3 Departures from any o ther International S tandard or other anti -doping rule or policy set forth in the Code or these Anti -Doping Rules shall not invalidate analytical results or other evidence of an anti -doping rule violation, and shall not constitute a defense to an anti -dopin g rule violation;15 provided , however, if the Athlete or other Person establishes that a departure from one of the specific International Standard provisions listed below could reasonably have caused an anti-doping rule violation based on an Adverse Analyti cal Finding or whereabouts failure, then WAKO shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding or the whereabouts failure: (i) a departure from the International Standard for Testing and Investigations r elated to Sample collection or Sample handling which could reasonably have caused an anti -doping rule violation based on an Adverse Analytical Finding , in which case WAKO shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding ; 14 [Comment to Article 3. |
2.2: Error! |
Main Document Only. |
The b urden is on the Athlete or other Person to establish, by a balance of probability, a departure from the International Standard for Laboratories that could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding. |
Thus, once the Athlete or other Person establi shes the departure by a bal ance of probability, the Athlete or other Person’s burden on causation is the somewhat lower standard of proof – “could reasonably have caused.” If the Athlete or other Person satisfies these stand ards, the burden shifts to WAKO to prove to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel that the departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding.] |
15 [Comment to Article 3.2.3: Departures from an International Standard or other rule unrelated to Sample collection or handlin g, Adverse Passport Finding, or Athlete notification relating to whereabouts failure or B Sample opening – e.g., the International S tandards for Education, International Standard for the Protection of Privacy and Personal In formation or International Stand ard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions – may result in compliance proceedings by WADA but are not a defense in an anti -doping rule violat ion proceeding and are not relevant on the issue of whether the Athlete committed an anti -doping rule violation. |
Similarly, WAKO’s violation of the document referenced in Article 20.7.7 of the Code shall not constitute a defense to an anti -doping rule viol ation.] |
WAKO Anti-Doping Rules Page 13 of 81 (ii) a dep arture from the International Standard for Results Management or International Standard for Testing and Investigations related to an Adverse Passport Finding which could reasonably have caused an anti -doping rule violation, in wh ich case WAKO shall have th e burden to establish that such departure did not cause the anti -doping rule violation; (iii) a departure from the International Standard for Results Management related to the requirement to provide notice to the Athlete of the B Sample opening which co uld reasonably have caused an anti -doping rule violation based on an Adverse Analytical Finding , in which case WAKO sh all have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding ;16 (iv) a dep arture from the Internation al Standard for Results Management related to Athlete notification which could reasonably have caused an anti -doping rule violation based on a whereabouts failure, in which case WAKO shall have the burden to establish that such d eparture did not cause the whereabouts failure. |
3.2.4 The facts established by a decision of a court or professional disciplinary tribunal of competent jurisdiction which is not the subject of a pending appeal shall be irrebuttable evidence against the Athlete or other Person to whom the decision pertained of those facts unless the Athlete or other Person establishes that the decision violated principles of natural justice. |
3.2.5 The hearing panel in a hearing on an anti -doping rule violation may draw an inference adverse to th e Athlete or other Person who is asserted to have committed an anti -doping rule violation based on the Athlete’s or other Person’s refusal, after a request made in a reasonable time in advance of the hearing, to appear at the hea ring (either in person or t elephonically as directed by the hearing panel) and to answer questions from the hearing panel or WAKO. |
16 [Comment to Article 3.2.3 (iii): WAKO would meet its burden to establish that su ch departure did not cause the A dverse Analytical Finding by showing that, for example, the B Sample opening and analysis were observed by an independent witness and no irregularities were observed.] |
WAKO Anti-Doping Rules Page 14 of 81 Article 4 The Prohibited list 4.1 Incorporation of the Prohibited List These Anti -Doping Rules incorporate the Prohibit ed List , which is published and revised by WADA as described in Article 4.1 of the Code . |
Unless provided otherwise in the Prohibited List or a revision, the Prohibited List and revisions shall go into effect under these Anti -Doping Rules three (3) months after publication by WADA , without requiring any further action by WAKO or its National Federations. |
All Athletes and other Persons shall be bound by the Prohibited List , and any revisions thereto, from the date they go into effect, without further formal ity. |
It is the responsibili ty of all Athletes and other Persons to familiarize themselves with the most up -to-date version of the Prohibited List and all revisions thereto. |
WAKO shall provide its National Federations with the most recent version of the Prohibited List . |
Each Nationa l Federation shall in turn ensure that its members, and the constituents of its members, are also provided with the most recent version of the Proh ibited List .17 4.2 Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods Identified on the Prohibited List 4.2.1 Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods The Prohibited List shall identify those Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods which are prohibited as doping at all times (both In-Competition and Out-of-Competition ) because of their potential to enhance performance in future Competitions or their masking potential, and those substances and methods which are prohibited In-Competition only. |
The Prohibited List may be expanded by WADA for a particular sport. |
Prohibited Substance s and Prohibited Methods may be included in the Prohibited List by general category (e.g., anabolic agents) or by specific reference to a particular substance or method.18 4.2.2 Specified Substances or Specified Methods For purposes of the application of Ar ticle 10, all Prohibited Su bstances shall be Specified Substan ces except as identified on the Prohibited List . |
No Prohibited Method shall be a Specified Method unless it is specifically identified as a Specified Method on the Prohibited List .19 17 [Comment to Article 4.1: The current Prohibited List is available on WADA's website a t https://www.wada -ama.org . |
The Prohibited List will be revised and published on an expedited basis whenever the need arises. |
However, for the sake of predictability, a new Prohibited List will be published every ye ar whether or not changes have been made.] |
18 [Comment to Article 4.2.1: Out -of-Competition Use of a substance which is o nly prohibited In -Competition is not an anti -doping rule violation unless an Adverse Analytical Findin g for the substance or its Metab olites or Markers is reported for a Sample collected In -Competition.] |
19 [Comment to Article 4.2.2: The Specified Substances and Specified Methods identified in Article 4.2.2 should not in any way be considered less importan t or less dangerous than other d oping substances or methods. |
Rather, they are simply substances and methods which are more likely to have been con sumed or used by an Athlete for a purpose other than the enhancement of sport performance. ] |
WAKO Anti-Doping Rules Page 15 of 81 4.2.3 Substa nces of Abuse For purpose s of applying Article 10, Substances of Abuse shall include those Prohibited Substances which are specifically identified as Substances of Abuse on the Prohibited List because they are frequently abused in society outside of the context of sport . |
4.3 WADA’s Determination of the Prohibited List WADA’s determination of the Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods that will be included on the Prohibited List , the classification of substances into categories on the Prohibited List, the classification of a substance as prohibited at all times or In-Competition only, the classification of a substance or method as a Specified Substance , Specified Method or Substa nce of Abuse is final and shall not be subject to any challenge by an Athlete or other Person including, but not limited to, any challenge based on an argument that the substance or method was not a masking agent or did not have the potential to enhance pe rformance, represent a health risk or violate the spirit of sport. |
4.4 Therapeutic Use Exempti ons (“TUEs ”) 4.4.1 The presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers , and/or the Use or Attempted Use , Possession or Administration or Attempted Administration of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method , shall not be considered an anti-doping rule violation if it is consistent with the provisions of a TUE granted in accordance with the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions . |
4.4.2 TUE Applications 4.4.2.1 Athletes who are not Internat ional -Level Athletes shall apply to their National Anti -Doping Organization for a TUE. |
If the National Anti -Doping Organization denies the application, the Athlete may appeal exclusively to the appellate body described in Article 13.2.2. |
4.4.2.2 Athletes who are International -Leve l Athletes shall apply to WAKO. |
WAKO Anti-Doping Rules Page 16 of 81 4.4.3 TUE Recognition20 4.4.3.1 Where the Athlete already has a TUE granted by their National Anti -Doping Organization pursuant to Article 4.4 of the Code for the substance or method in question and provided that such TUE has been reported in accordance with Article 5.5 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions , WAKO will automatically recognize it for purposes of international -level Competition without the need to review the r elevant clinical informatio n. 4.4.3.2 If WAKO chooses to test an Athlete who is not an International -Level At hlete , WAKO must recognize a TUE granted to that Athlete by their National Anti -Doping Organization unless the Athlete is required to apply for recognition of the TUE pursu ant to Articles 5.8 and 7.0 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exempt ions. |
4.4.4 TUE Application Process 21 4.4.4.1 If the Athlete does not already have a TUE granted by their National Anti -Doping Organization for the substance or method in question, the Athlete must apply directly to WAKO. |
4.4.4.2 An application to WAKO for grant or recognition of a TUE must be made as soon as possible, save where Articles 4.1 or 4.3 of the International Standard for Therape utic Use Exemptions apply. |
The application shall be made in accordance with Article 6 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions as posted on WAKO’s website. |
4.4.4.3 WAKO shall establish a Therapeutic Use Exemption Committee (“WAKO TUEC ”) to consider applications for the grant or recognition of TUEs . |
in accordance with Article 4.4.4.3(a) -(d) below: 20 [Comment to Art icle 4.4.3: If WAKO refuses to r ecognize a TUE granted by a National Anti -Doping Organization only because medical records or other information ar e missing that are needed to demonstrate satisfaction with the criteria in the International Standard for Ther apeutic Use Exemptions, the matt er should not be referred to WADA. |
Instead, the file should be completed and re -submitted to WAKO.] |
[Comment to A rticle 4.4.3: WAKO may agree with a National Anti -Doping Organization that the National Anti-Doping Organizati on will consider TUE application s on behalf of WAKO.] |
21 [Comment to Article 4.4.4: The submission of falsified documents to a WAKO TUEC or WAKO, offering or accepting a bribe to a Person to perform or fail to perform an act, procuring false testimony fro m any witness, or committing any other fraudulent act or any other similar intentional interference or Attempted interference with any aspect of t he TUE process shall result in a charge of Tampering or Attempted Tampering under Article 2.5. |
An Athlete sho uld not assume that their applic ation for the grant or recognition of a TUE (or for renewal of a TUE) will be granted. |
Any Use or Possession or Ad ministration of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method before an application has been granted is entirely at the Athlete’s own risk.] |
WAKO Anti-Doping Rules Page 17 of 81 (a) The WAKO TUEC shall consist of a minimum of five (5) members with experience in the care and treatment of Athletes and sound knowledge of clinical, sports and exerc ise medicine. |
Each appointed member should serve a term of four (4) years which is renewable. |
(b) Before serving as a member of the WAKO TUEC, each member must sign a conflict of interest and confidentiality declaration. |
The ap pointed members shall not b e employees of WAKO. |
(c) When an application to WAKO for the grant or recognition of a TUE is made, the Chair of the WAKO TUEC or the WAKO shall appoint three (3) members (which may include the Chair) to consider the applicatio n. (d) Before considering a TUE application, each member shall disclose any circumstances likely to affect their impartiality with respect to the Athlete making the application. |
If a member is unwilling or unable to assess the Athlete’s TUE application, for any reason, the Chair o r the WAKO shall appoint a replacement from the pool of members appointed under point (a) above. |
The Chair cannot serve as a member of the WAKO TUEC if there are any circumstances which are likely to affect the impartiality of th e TUE decision. |
4.4.4.4 The WAKO TUEC shall promptly evaluate and decide upon the application in accordance with the relevant provisions of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions and usually (i.e., unless exceptional circumstances appl y) within no more than twen ty-one (21) days of receipt of a complete application. |
Where the application is made in a reasonable time prior to an Event , the WAKO TUEC must use its best endeavours to issue its decision before the start of the Event . |
4.4.4.5 The WAKO TUEC decision sha ll be the final decision of WAKO and may be appealed in accordance with Article 4.4.7. |
WAKO TUEC decision shall be notified in writing to the Athlete , and to WADA and other Anti-Doping Organizations in accordance with the Interna tional Standard for Therape utic Use Exemptions . |
It shall also promptly be reported into ADAMS . |
4.4.4.6 If WAKO (or the National Anti -Doping Organization , where it has agreed to consider the application on behalf of WAKO) denies the Athlete’s application, it must notify the Athlete promptl y, with reasons. |
If WAKO grants the Athlete’s application, it must notify not only the Athlete but also their WAKO Anti-Doping Rules Page 18 of 81 National Anti -Doping Organization . |
If the National Anti -Doping Organization considers th at the TUE granted by WAKO does not meet the criteria set out in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions , it has twenty -one (21) days from such notification to refer the matter to WADA for review in accordance with Article 4.4.7. |
If the National Anti -Doping Organizat ion refers the matter to WADA for review, the TUE granted by WAKO remains valid for international -level Competition and Out-of-Competition Testing (but is not valid for national -level Competition ) pending WADA’s decisio n. If the National Anti -Doping Organi zation does not refer the m atter to WADA for review, the TUE granted by WAKO becomes valid for national -level Competitio n as well when the twenty -one (21) day review deadline expires. |
4.4.5 Retroactive TUE Applications If WAKO chooses to collect a Sample from an Athlete who is not an International -Level Athlete or a National -Level Athlete , and that Athlete is Using a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method for therapeutic reasons, WAKO must permit that Athlete to apply for a retroactive TUE. |
4.4.6 Expiration, Withdrawal or Rever sal of a TUE 4.4.6.1 A TUE granted pursuant to these Anti -Doping Rules: (a) shall expire automatically at the end of any term for which it was granted, without the need for any further notice or other formality; (b) will be wit hdrawn if the Athlete does not promptly comply with any requirements or conditions imposed by the WAKO TUEC upon grant of the TUE; (c) may be withdrawn by the WAKO TUEC if it is subsequently determined that the criteria for grant of a TUE are not in fact m et; or (d) may be reversed on review by WADA or on appe al. |
4.4.6.2 In such event, the Athlete shall not be subject to any Consequences based on their Use or Possession or Administration of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method in question in acc ordance with the TUE prior to the effective date of expiry, withdrawal, or reversal of the TUE. |
The review pursuant to Article 5.1.1.1 of the International Standard for Results Management of an Adverse Analytical Finding, reported shortly after the TUE expiry, withdrawal or reversal , shall include consideration of whether such finding is consistent with Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method prior to that date, in which event no anti -doping rule violation shall be asserted. |
WAKO Anti-Doping Rules Page 19 of 81 4.4.7 Reviews and Appeals of TUE Decisions 4.4.7.1 WADA must review WAKO’s decision not to recognize a TUE granted by the National Anti -Doping Organization that is referred to WADA by the Athlete or the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization . |
In addition, WADA must review WAKO’s decision to g rant a TUE that is referred to WADA by the Athlete’s National Anti -Doping Organization . |
WADA may review any other TUE decisions at any time, whether upon request by those affected or on its own initiative. |
If the TUE decisio n bei ng reviewed meets the crite ria set out in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions , WADA will not interfere with it. |
If the TUE decision does not meet those criteria, WADA will reverse it.22 4.4.7.2 Any TUE decision by WAKO (or by a National Anti -Doping Organizati on where it has agreed to consider the application on behalf of WAKO) that is not reviewed by WADA , or that is reviewed by WADA but is not reversed upon review, may be appealed by the Athlete and/or the Athlete’s National Anti -Doping Organization, exclusiv ely to CAS.23 4.4.7.3 A decision by WADA to reverse a TUE decision may be appealed by the Athlete, the National Anti -Doping Organization and/or WAKO, exclusively to CAS. |
4.4.7.4 A failure to render a decision within a reasonabl e time on a properly submit ted application for grant/recognition of a TUE or for review of a TUE decision shall be considered a denial of the application thus triggering the applicable rights of review/appea l. 22 [Comment to Article 4.4.7.1: WADA shall be entitled to charge a fee to cover the costs of: (a) any review it is required to conduct in accordance with Article 4.4.7; and (b) any review it chooses to conduct, where the decisi on being reviewed is reversed.] |
23 [Comment to Article 4.4.7.2: In such cases, the decision being appealed is the WAKO’s TUE decision, not WADA’s decision not to review the TUE decision or (having reviewed it) not to reverse the TUE decision. |
However, th e time to appeal the TUE decisio n doe s not begin to run until the date that WADA communicates its decision. |
In any event, whether the decision has been reviewed by WADA or not, WADA shall be given notice of the appeal so that it may participate if it sees fit.] |
WAKO Anti-Doping Rules Page 20 of 81 Article 5 Testing and investigations 5.1 Purpose of Testing and Invest igations24 5.1.1 Testing and investigations may be undertaken for any anti -doping purpose. |
They shall be conducted in conformity with the provisions of the International Standard for Testing and Investigations and the eventual sp ecific protocols of WAKO su pplementing that Interna tional Standard. |
5.1.2 Testing shall be undertaken to obtain analytical evidence as to whether the Athlete has violated Article 2.1 ( Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an Athlete ’s Sample ) or Article 2.2 ( Use or Attempted Use by an Athlete of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method ). |
5.2 Authority to Test 5.2.1 Subject to the limitations for Event Testing set out in Article 5.3, WAKO shall have In-Competition and Out-of-Competition Testing authority over all Athletes specified in the Introduction to these Anti -Doping Rules (Section “Scope of these Anti -Doping Rules”). |
5.2.2 WAKO may require a ny Athlete over whom it has Testing authority (including any Athlete serving a period of Ineligibi lity) to provide a Sample at any time and at any place.25 5.2.3 WADA shall have In-Competition and Out-of-Competition Testing authority as set out in Article 20.7.10 of the Code . |
5.2.4 If WAKO delegates or contracts any part o f Testing to a National Ant i-Doping Organization directly or through a National Federation , that National Anti -Doping Organization may collect additional Samples or direct the laboratory to perform additional types of analysis at the National Anti -Doping O rganization’s expense. |
If a dditional Samples are collected or additional types of analysis are performed, WAKO shall be notified. |
24 [Comment to Article 5. |
1: Wh ere Testing is conducted for anti -doping purposes, the analytical results and data may be used for other legitimate purposes under the Anti -Doping Organization’s rules. |
See, e.g., Comment to Article 23.2.2 of the Code.] |
25 [Comment to Article 5.2.2: WAKO may obtain additional authority to conduct Testing by means of bilateral or multilateral agreements with other Signatories. |
Unless the Athlete has identified a sixty (60) minute Testing window between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., or has othe rwise consented to Testing during that period, WAKO will not test an Athlete during that period unless it has a serious and specific suspicion that the Athlete may be engaged in doping. |
A challenge to whether WAKO had suffic ient suspicion for Testing durin g this time period shall not be a defense to an anti -doping rule violation based on such test or attempted test.] |
WAKO Anti-Doping Rules Page 21 of 81 5.3 Event Testing 5.3.1 Except as otherwise provided below, only a single organization shall have authority to conduct Testing at Event Venues during an Event Period . |
At International Events , WAKO (or other international organization which is the ruling body for an Event ) shall have authority to conduct Testing . |
At National Events , the National Anti -Doping Organization of that country shall have authori ty to conduct Testing . |
At the request of WAKO (or other international organization which is the ruling body for an Event ), any Testing during the Event Period outside of the Event Venues shall be coordinated with WAKO (or the relevant ruling body of the Event). |
5.3.2 If an Anti-Doping Organization, which would otherwise have Testing authority but is not responsible for initi ating and directing Testing at an Event , desires to conduct Testing of Athletes at the Event Venues during the Event Period , the Anti-Doping Organization shall first confer with WAKO (or other international organization which is the ruling body of the Event ) to obtain permission to conduct and coordinate such Testing . |
If the Anti-Doping Organization is not satisfied with the response fr om WAKO (or other international organization which is the ruling body of the Event ), the Anti-Doping Organization may, in accordance with the procedures described in the International Standard for Testing and Investigations, ask WADA for permission to cond uct Testing and to determine how to coordinat e such Testing . |
WADA shall not grant approval for such Testing before consulting with and informing WAKO (or other international organization which is the ruling body for the Event ). |
WADA’s decision shall be fin al and not subject to appeal. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.