text stringlengths 1 17.8k |
|---|
8.1.2 Hearing Process 8.1.2.1 When FIL sends a notice to an Athlete or other Person notifying them of a potential anti -doping rule violation, and the Athlete or other Person does not waive a hearing in accordance with Article 8.3.1 or Article 8.3.2, then the case shall be referred to CAS ADD for hearing and adj... |
8.1.2.2 Hearings held in connection with Event s in respect to Athletes and other Persons who are subject to these Anti -Doping Rules may be conducted by an expedited process where permitted by C AS ADD.36 8.1.2.3 WADA, the National Federation and the National Anti -Doping Organization of the Athlete or other P... |
In any event, FIL shall keep them fully apprised as to the status of pending cases and the result of all hearings. |
8.2 Notice of Decisions 8.2.1 At the end of the hearing, or promptly thereafter, CAS ADD shall issue a written decision that conforms with Article 9 of the International Standard for Results Management and which includes the full reasons for the decision, the period of Ineligibility imposed, the Disqualification ... |
8.2.2 FIL shall notify that decision to the Athlete or other Person and to other Anti-Doping Organ izations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3, and shall promptly report it into ADAMS . |
The decision may be appealed as provided in Article 13. |
36 [Comment to Article 8.1.2.4: For example, a hearing could be expedited on the eve of a major Event where the resolution of the anti-doping rule violation is necessary to determine the Athlete 's eligibility to participate in the Event, or during an Event where the resolution of the case will affect the validity of ... |
FIL 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 27 of 64 8.3 Waiver of Hearing 8.3.1 An Athlete or other Person against whom an anti -doping rule violation is asserted may waive a hearing expressly and agree with the Consequences proposed by FIL. |
8.3.2 However, if the Athlete or other Person against whom an anti -doping rule violation is asserted fails to dispute th at assertion within twenty (20) days or the deadline otherwise specified in the notice sent by the FIL asserting the violation, then they shall be deemed to have waived a hearing, to have admitted... |
8.3.3 In cases where Article 8.3.1 or 8.3.2 applies, a hearing before CAS ADD shall not be requi red. |
Instead FIL shall promptly issue a written decision that conforms with Article 9 of the International Standard for Results Management and which includes the full reasons for the decision, the period of Ineligibility imposed, the Disqualification of results under Article 10.10 and, if applicable, a justification for ... |
8.3.4 FIL shall notify that decision to the Athlete or other Person and to other Anti-Doping Organizations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3, and shall promptly report it into ADAMS . |
FIL shall Publicly Disclose that decision in accordance with Article 14.3.2. |
8.4 Single Hearing Before CAS Anti-doping rule violations asserted against International -Level Athletes , National -Level Athletes or other Persons may, with the consent of the Athlete or other Person , FIL (where it has Results Management responsibility in accordance with Article 7) and WADA , be heard in a s... |
Such waiver, however, only binds the parties to such agreement and not any other entity with a right of appeal under the Code.] |
38 [Comment to Article 9: For Team Sports, any awards received by individual players will be Disqualified. |
However, Disqualifica tion of the team will be as provided in Article 11. |
In sports which are not Team Sports but where awards are given to teams, Disqua lification or other disciplinary action against the team when one or more team members have committed an anti -doping rule violation shall be as provided in the applicable rules of the International Federation.] |
FIL 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 28 of 64 including forfeiture of all medals, points and prizes, except as provided in Article 10.1.2. |
Factors to be included in considering whether to Disqualify other results in an Event might include, for example, the seriousness of the Athlete’s anti-doping rule violation and whether the Athlete tested negative in the other Competitions .39 10.1.2 If the Athlete establishes that he or she bears No Fault or Neg... |
10.2 Ineligibility for Presence, Use or Attempted Use , or Possession of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method The period of Ineligibility for a violation of Article 2.1, 2.2 or 2.6 shall be as follows, subject to potential elimination, reduction or suspension pursuant to Article 10.5, 10.6 or 10.7: 10.2.1... |
10.2.2 If Article 10.2.1 does not apply, subject to Article 10.2.4.1, the period of Ineligibility shall be two (2) years. |
10.2.3 As used in Article 10.2, the term “intentional” is mea nt to identify those Athletes or other Persons who engage in conduct which they knew constituted an anti -doping rule violation or knew that there was a significant risk that the conduct might constitute or result in an anti -doping rule violation and ma... |
An anti -doping rule violation resulting from an Adverse Analytical Finding for a substance which is only prohibited In-Competition shall be rebuttably presumed to be not “intentional ” if the substance is a Specified Substance and the Athlete can establish that the Prohibited Substance was Used Out-of-Competitio... |
An anti -doping rule violation resulting from an Adverse Analytical Finding for a substance which is only prohibited In-Compe tition shall not be considered “intentional ” if the substance is not a Specified Substance and 39 [Comment to Article 10.1.1: Whereas Artic le 9 Disqualifies the result in a single Competit... |
40 [Comment to Article 10.2.1.1: While it is theoretically possible for an Athlete or other Person to establish that the anti -doping rule violation was not intentional without showing how the Prohibited Substance entered one’s system, it is highly unlikely that in a doping case under Article 2.1 an Athlete will be su... |
FIL 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 29 of 64 the Athlete can establish that the Prohibited Substance was Used Out-of-Competition in a context unrelated to sport performance.41 10.2.4 Notwithstanding any other provision in Article 10.2, where the anti -doping rule violation involves a Substance of Abuse : 10.2... |
In addition, the period of Ineligibility calculated under this Article 10.2.4.1 may be reduced to one (1) month if the Athlete or other Person satisfactorily completes a Substance of Abuse treatment program approved by FIL. |
The period of Ineligibility established in this Article 10.2.4.1 is not subject to any reduction based on any provision in Article 10.6.42 10.2.4.2 If the ingestion, Use or Possession occurred In-Competition , and the Athlete can establish that the context of the ingestion, Use or Possession was unrelated to spo... |
10.3 Ineligibility for Other Anti-Doping Rule Violations The period of Ineligibility for anti -doping rule violations other than as provided in Article 10.2 shall be as follows, unless Article 10. |
6 or 10. |
7 are applicable: 10.3.1 For violations of Article 2.3 or 2.5, the period of Ineligibility shall be four (4) years except: (i) in the case of failing to submit to Sample collection, if the Athlete can establish that the commission of the anti -doping rule violation was not intentional, the period of Ineligibility... |
10.3.2 For violations of Article 2.4, the period of Ineligibility shall be two (2) years, subject to reduction down to a minimum of one (1) year, depending on the Athlete’s degree of Fault . |
The flexibility between two (2) years and one (1) year of Ineligibility in this Article is not available to Athletes where a pattern of last - 41 [Comment to Article 10.2.3: Article 10.2.3 provides a special definition of “intentional” which is to be applied solely for purposes of Article 10.2.] |
42 [Comment to Article 10.2.4.1: The determination s as to whether the treatment program is approved and whether the Athlete or other Person has sati sfactorily complete d the program shall be made in the sole discretion of FIL. |
This Article is intended to give FIL the leeway to apply their own judgment to i dentify and approve legitimate and reputable, as opposed to “sham”, treatment programs. |
It is anti cipated, however, that the characteristics of legitimate treatment programs may vary widely and change over time such that it would not be practical for WADA to develop mandatory criteria for acceptable treatment programs.] |
FIL 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 30 of 64 minute whereabouts changes or other conduct raises a serious suspicion that the Athlete was trying to avoid being available for Testing . |
10.3.3 For violations of Article 2.7 or 2.8, the period of Ineligibility shall be a minimum of four (4) years up to lifetime Ineligibility , depending on the seriousness of the violation. |
An Article 2.7 or Article 2.8 violation involving a Protected Person shall be considered a particularly serious violat ion and, if committed by Athlete Support Personnel for violations other than for Specified Substances , shall result in lifetime Ineligibility for Athlete Support Personnel . |
In addition, significant violations of Article 2.7 or 2.8 which may also violate no n-sporting laws and regulations, shall be reported to the competent administrative, professional or judicial authorities.43 10.3.4 For violations of Article 2.9, the period of Ineligibility imposed shall be a minimum of two (2) years... |
10.3.5 For violations of Article 2.10, the period of Ineligibility shall be two (2) years, subject to reduction down to a minimum of one (1) year, depending on the Athlete or other Person’s degree of Fault and other circumstances of the case.44 10.3.6 For violations of Article 2.11, the period of Ineligibili... |
Since the authority of sport organizations is generally limited to Ineli gibility for accreditation, membership a nd other sport benefits, reporting Athlete Support Personnel to competent authorities is an important step in the deterrence of doping.] |
44 [Comment to Article 10.3.5: Where the “other Person” referenced in Article 2.10 is an entity and not an individual, that entity may be disciplined as provided in Article 12.] |
45 [Comment to Article 10.3.6: Conduct that is found to violate both Article 2.5 (Tampering) and Article 2.11 (Acts by an Athlet e or Other Person to Discourage or Retaliate Against Reporting to Authorities) shall be sanctioned based on the violation that carries the more severe sanction.] |
46 [Comment to Article 10.4: Violations under Articles 2.7 (Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking), 2.8 (Administration or Attempted Adminis tration), 2.9 (Complicity or Attempted Complicity) and 2.11 (Acts by an Athlete or Other Person to Discourage or Retaliate Against Reporting to Authorities ) are not included in... |
FIL 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 31 of 64 10.5 Elimination of the Period of Ineligibility where there is No Fault or Negligence If an Athlete or other Person establishes in an individual case that he or she bears No Fault or Negligence , then the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility shall be eliminated... |
All reductions under Article 10.6 .1 are mutually exclusive and not cumulative. |
10.6.1.1 Specified Substances or Specified Methods Where the anti -doping rule violation involves a Specified Substance (other than a Substance of Abuse ) or Specified Method , and the Athlete or other Person can establish No Significant Fault or Negligence , then the period of Ineligibility shall be, at a min... |
10.6.1.2 Contaminated Products In cases where the Athlete or other Person can establish both No Significant Fault or Negligence and that the detected Prohibited Substance (other than a Substance of Abuse ) came from a Contaminated Product , then the period of Ineligibility shall be, at a minimum, a reprimand ... |
They will only apply in exceptional circumstances, for example, where an Athlete could prove that, despite all due car e, he or she was sabotaged by a competitor. |
Conversely, No Fault or Negligence would not apply in the following circumstances: (a) a positive test resulting from a mislabeled or contaminated vi tamin or nutritional supplement (Athletes are responsible for w hat they ingest (Article 2.1) and have been warned against the possibility of supplement contamination); ... |
However, depending on the unique facts of a particular case, any of the referenced illustrations could result in a red uced sanction under Article 10.6 based on No Significant Fault or Negligence.] |
48 [Comment to Article 10.6.1.2: In order to receive the benefit of this Article, the Athlete or other Person must establish not only that the detected Prohibited Substance cam e from a Contaminated Product, but must also separately establish No Significant Fault or Negligence. |
It should be further noted that Athletes are on notice that they take nutritional supplements at their own risk. |
The sanction reduction based on No Signif icant Fault or Negligence has rarely been applied in Contaminated Product cases unless the Athlete has exercised a high level of caution before taking the Contaminated Product. |
In assessing whether the Athlete ca n establish the source of the Prohibited Sub stance, it would, for example, be significant for purposes of establishing whether the Athlete actually Used the Contaminated Product, whether the Athlete had declared the product which was subsequently determined to be contaminated on the... |
This Article should not be extended beyond products that have gone through some process of manufacturing. |
Where an Adverse Analytical Finding results from environment contamination of a “non -product” such as tap water or lake water in circumstances where no reasonable person would expect any risk of an anti -doping rule violation, typically there would be No Fault or Negligence under Article 10.5.] |
FIL 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 32 of 64 10.6.1.3 Protected Persons or Recreational Athletes Where the anti -doping rule violation not involving a Substance of Abuse is committed by a Protected Person or Recreational Athlete , and the Protected Person or Recreational Athlete can establish No Significant ... |
10.6.2 Application of No Significant Fault or Negligence beyond the Application of Article 10.6.1 If an Athlete or other Person establishes in an individual case where Article 10.6.1 is not applicable that he or she bears No Significant Fault or Negligence , then, subject to fu rther reduction or elimination as ... |
7, the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be reduced based on the Athlete or other Perso n’s degree of Fault , but the reduced period of Ineligibility may not be less than one -half of the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable. |
If the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility is a lifetime, the reduced period under this Article may be no less than eight (8) years.49 10.7 Elimination, Reduction, or Suspension of Period of Ineligibility or other Consequences for Reasons other than Fault 10.7.1 Substantial Assistance in Discovering ... |
After an appellate decision under Article 13 or the expiration of time to appeal, FIL may only suspend a part of the otherwise applicable Consequences with the approval of WADA . |
49 [Comment to Article 10.6.2: Article 10.6.2 may be applied to any anti -doping rule violation except those Articles where intent is an element of the anti -doping rule violation (e.g., Article 2.5, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9 or 2.11) or an element of a particular sanction (e.g., Article 10.2.1) or a range of Ineligibility is alr... |
50 [Comment to Article 10.7.1: The cooperation of Athletes, Athlete Support Personnel and other Persons who acknowledge their mistakes and are willing to bring other anti -doping rule violations to light i s important to clean sport.] |
FIL 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 33 of 64 The extent to which the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be suspended shall be based on the seriousness of the anti -doping rule violation committed by the Athlete or other Person and the significance of the Substantial Assistance provided by the Athlete or... |
No more than three -quarters of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be suspended. |
If the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility is a lifetime, the non -suspended peri od under this Article must be no less than eight (8) years. |
For purposes of this paragraph, the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility shall not include any period of Ineligibility that could be added under Article 10.9.3.2 of the se Anti -Doping Rules . |
If so requested by an Athlete or other Person who seeks to provide Substantial Assistance , FIL shall allow the Athlete or other Person to provide the information to it subject to a Without Prejudice Agreement . |
If the Athlete or other Person fails to continue to cooperate and to provide the complete and credible Substantial Assistance upon which a suspension of Consequences was based, F IL shall reinstate the original Consequences . |
If F IL decides to reinstate suspended Consequences or decides not to reinstate suspended Consequences , that decision may be appealed by any Person entitled to appeal under Article 13. |
10.7.1.2 To further encourage Athlete s and other Person s to provide Substantial Assistance to Anti-Doping Organization s, at the request of FIL or at the request of the Athlete or other Person who has , or has been asserted to have , committed an anti -doping rule violation, or other violation of the Code , WADA... |
In exceptional circumstances, WADA may agree to suspensions of the period of Ineligibili ty and other Consequences for Substantial Assistance greater than those otherwise provided in this Article, or even no period of Ineligibility , no mandatory Public Disclosure and/or no return of prize money or payment of fines... |
WADA ’s approval sha ll be subject to reinstatement of Consequences , as otherwise provided in this Article. |
Notwithstanding Article 13, WADA ’s decisions in the context of this Article 10.7.1.2 may not be appealed. |
10.7.1.3 If FIL suspends any part of an otherwise applicable sanction because of Substantial Assistance , then notice providing justification for the decision shall be provided to the other Anti-Doping Organizations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3 as provided in Article 14 . |
In unique circumstances where WADA determines that it would be in the best interest of anti -doping, WADA may authorize F IL to enter into appropriate confidentiality agreements limiting or delaying the disclosure of the Substantial Assistance agreement or the nature of Substantial Assistanc e being provided. |
FIL 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 34 of 64 10.7.2 Admission of an Anti -Doping Rule Violation in the Absence of Other Evidence Where an Athlete or other Person voluntarily admits the commission of an anti -doping rule violation before having received notice of a Sample collection which could establish an anti... |
If the Athlete or other Person establishes entitlement to a reduction or suspension of the period of Ineligibility under Article 10.7, then the period of Ineligibility may be redu ced or suspended, but not below one -fourth of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility . |
10.8 Results Management Agreements 10.8.1 One (1) Year Reduction for Certain Anti -Doping Rule Violations Based on Early Admission and Acceptance of Sanction Where an Athlete or other Person , after being notified by F IL of a potential anti -doping rule violation that carries an asserted period of Ineligib i... |
Where the Athlete or other Person receives the one (1) year reduction in the asserted period of Ineligibility under this Article 10.8.1, no further reduction in the asserted period of Ineligibility shall be allowed under any other Article.52 10.8.2 Case Resolution Agreement Where the Athlete or other Perso... |
It is not intended to apply to circumstances where the admission occurs after the Athlete or other Perso n believes he or she is about to be caught. |
The amount by which Ineligibility is reduced should be based on the likelihood that the Athlete or other Person would have been caught had he or she not come forward voluntarily.] |
52 [Comment to Article 10.8.1: For example, if FIL alleges that an Athlete has violated Article 2.1 for Use of an anabolic steroid and asserts the applicable period of Ineligibility is four (4) years, then the Athlete may unilaterally reduce the period of Inel igibility to three (3) years by admitting the violation an... |
This resolves the case without any need for a hearing.] |
FIL 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 35 of 64 Ineligibility may start as early as the date of Sample collection or the date on which another anti-doping rule violation last occurred. |
In each case, ho wever, where this Article is applied, the Athlete or other Person shall serve at least one -half of the agreed -upon period of Ineligibility going forward from the earlier of the date the Athlete or other Person accepted the imposition of a sanction or a Provisional Suspension which was subsequen... |
The decision by WADA and F IL to enter or not enter into a case resolution agreement, and the amount of the reduction to, and the starting date of, the period of Ineligibil ity are not matters for determination or review by a hearing body and are not subject to appeal under Article 13. |
If so requested by an Athlete or other Person who seeks to enter into a case resolution agreement under this Article, F IL shall allow the Athlete or other Person to discuss an admission of the anti -doping rule violation with it subject to a Without Prejudice Agreement .53 10.9 Multiple Violations 10.9.1 Sec... |
The period of Ineligibility within this range shall be determined based on the entirety of the circumstances and the Athlete or other Person ’s degree of Fault with respect to the second violation. |
10.9.1.2 A third anti -doping rule violation will always result in a lifetime period of Ineligibility , except if the third violation fulfills the condition for elimination or reduction of the period of Ineligibility under Article 10.5 or 10.6, or involves a violatio n of Article 2.4. |
In these particular cases, the period of Ineligibility shall be from eight (8) years to lifetime Ineligibility . |
10.9.1. |
3 The period of Ineligibility established in Articles 10.9.1.1 and 10.9.1.2 may then be further reduced by the applic ation of Article 10.7. |
53 [Comment to Article 10.8: Any mitigating or aggravating factors set forth in this Article 10 shall be considered in arriving at the Consequences set forth in the case resolution agreement, and shall not be applicable beyond the terms of that agreement.] |
FIL 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 36 of 64 10.9.2 An anti -doping rule violation for which an Athlete or other Person has established No Fault or Negligence shall not be considered a violation for purposes of this Article 10.9. |
In addition, an anti -doping rule violation sanctioned under Article 10.2.4.1 shall not be considered a violation for purposes of Article 10.9 . |
10.9.3 Additional Rules for Certain Pot ential Multiple Violations 10.9.3.1 For purposes of imposing sanctions under Article 10.9, except as provided in Articles 10.9.3.2 and 10.9.3.3, an anti -doping rule violation will only be considered a second violation if F IL can establish that the Athlet e or other Perso... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.