text stringlengths 1 17.8k |
|---|
Substance of Abuse : See Article 4.2.4. |
Substantial Assistance: For purposes of Article 10. |
7.1 of the Code, a Person providing Substantial Assistance must: (1) fully disclose in a signed written statement or recorded interview all information he or she possesses in relation to anti -doping rule violations or other proceeding described in Article 10.7.1.1 of the Code, and (2) fully cooperate with the inve... |
Further, the information provided must be credible and must comprise an important part of any case or proceeding which is initiated or, if no case or proceeding is initiated, must have provided a sufficient basis on which a case or proceeding could have been brought. |
Tampering : Intentional conduct which subverts the Doping Control process but which would not otherwise be included in the definition of Prohibited Methods . |
Tampering shall include, without limitation, offering or accepting a bribe to perform or fail to perform an act, preventing the collection of a Sample , affecting or making impossible the analysis of a Sample , falsifying documents submitted to an Anti -Doping Organi sation or TUE committee or hearing panel, procuring... |
Team Sport: A sport in which the substitution of players is permitted during a Competition . |
Technical Document: A document adopted and published by WADA from time to time containing mandatory technical requirements on specific anti -doping topics as set forth in an International Standard. |
Testing : The parts of the Doping Control process involving test distribution planning, Sample collection, Sample handling, and Sample transport to the laboratory. |
Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) : A Therapeutic Use Exemption allows an Athlete with a medical condition to U se a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method , but only if the conditions set out in Article 4.4 of these Rules and the Internatio nal Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions are met . |
IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXXIII Olympiad Paris 2024 49 / 49 Threshold Substance : An exogenous or endogenous Prohibited Substance , Metabolite or Marker of a Prohibited Substance for which the identification and quantitative determination (e.g. |
concentration, ratio, score) in excess of a pre -determined Decision Limit, or, when applicable, the establishment of an exogenous origin, constitutes an Adverse Analytical Finding. |
Threshold Substances are identified as such in the Technical Document on Decision Limits. |
Trafficking : Selling, giving, transporting, sending, delivering or distributing (or Possessing for any such purpose) a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method (either physically or by any electronic or other means) by an Athlete , Athlete Support Person nel or any other Person subject to the authority of an Anti... |
TUEC : Therapeutic Use Exemption Committee, as described in Article 4.4.2. |
Use: The utilisation, application, ingestion, injection or consumption by any means whatsoever of any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method. |
WADA : The World Anti- Doping Agency. |
IOF Anti -Doping Rules Valid from 1.1.2021 IOF Anti-Doping Rules Page 2 of 66 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 3 ARTICLE 1 DEFINITION OF DOPING ....................... |
These Anti -Doping Rules are sport rules governing the conditions under which sport is played. |
Aimed at enforcing Anti-Doping rules in a global and harmonized manner, they are distinct in nature from criminal and civil laws. |
They are not intended to be subject to or limited by any national requirements and legal standards a pplicable to criminal or civil proceedings, although they are intended to be applied in a manner which respects the principles of proportionality and human rights. |
When reviewing the facts and the law of a given case, all courts, arbitral tribunals and oth er adjudicating bodies should be aware of and respect the distinct nature of these Anti -Doping Rules, which implement the Code , and the fact that these rules represent the consensus of a broad spectrum of stakeholders around ... |
As provided in the Code , the IOF shall be responsible for conducting all aspects of Doping Control . |
Any aspect of Doping Control or anti -doping Education may be delegated by the IOF to a Delegated Third Part y, such as the International Testing Agency (ITA) , however, the IOF shall require the Delegated Third Party to perform such aspects in compliance with the Code, International Standards , and these Anti -Do... |
The IOF may delegate its adjudication res ponsibilities and Results Management to the CAS Anti-Doping Division. |
When the IOF has delegated its responsibilities to implement part or all of Doping Control to the Delegated Third Party, any reference to t he IOF in these Rules should be i ntended as a reference to that Delegated Third Party , where applicable and within the context of the aforementioned delegation. |
The IOF shall always remain full y responsible for ensuring that any delegated aspects are performed in compliance with the Code. |
Italicized terms in these Anti -Doping Rules are defined terms in Appendix 1. |
Unless otherwise specified, references to Articles are references to Articles of the se Anti -Doping Rules. |
Fundamental Rationale for the Code and the IOF 's Anti -Doping Rules Anti-doping programs are founded on the intrinsic value of sport. |
This intrinsic value is often referred to as "the spirit of sport": the ethical pursuit of human excellence through the dedicated perfection of each Athlete’s natural talents. |
Anti-doping programs seek to protect the health of Athletes and to provide the opportunity for Athletes to pursue human excellence without the Use of Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods . |
Anti-doping programs seek to maintain the integrity of sport in terms of respect f or rules, other competitors, fair competition, a level playing field, and the value of clean sport to the world. |
The spirit of sport is the celebration of the human spirit, body and mind. |
It is the essence of Olympism and is reflected in the values we find in and through sport, including: • Health • Ethics, fair play and honesty • Athletes’ rights as set forth in the Code IOF Anti-Doping Rules Page 4 of 66 • Excellence in performance • Character and Education • Fun and joy • Teamwork • D... |
Doping is fundamentally contrary to the spirit of sport. |
Scope of these Anti -Doping Rules These Anti -Doping Rules shall apply to: (a) The IOF , including its board members, directors, officers and specified employees , and Delegated Third Parties and their employees, who are involved in any aspect of Doping Control ; (b) each of its National Federations , including ... |
Each of the abovementioned Persons is deemed, as a condition of his or her participation or involvement in the sport, to have agreed to and be bound by these Anti-Doping Rules, and to have submitted to the author ity of the IOF to enforce these Anti -Doping Rules, including any Consequences for the breach thereof, ... |
Rather, such Person would only be subject to disc ipline for a violation of Code Articles 2.5 (Tampering), 2.7 (Trafficking), 2.8 (Administration), 2.9 (Complicity), 2.10 (Proh ibited Association) and 2.11 (Retaliation). |
Furthermore, such Person would be subject to the additional roles and IOF Anti-Doping Rules Page 5 of 66 Within the overall pool of Athletes set out above who are bound by and required to comply with these Anti -Doping Rules, the following Athletes shall be considered to be International -Level Athletes for the... |
responsibilities according to Code Article 21.3. |
Also, the obligation to require an employee to be bound by the Code is subject to applicable law. |
The IOF shall ensure that, as per Article 19 of these Anti -Doping Rules, any arrangements with their board members, director s, officers, and specified employees , as well as with the Delegated Third Parties and their employees – either employment, contractual or otherwise – have explicit provisions incorporated acc... |
IOF Anti-Doping Rules Page 6 of 66 ARTICLE 1 DEFINITION OF DOPING Doping is defined as the occurrence of one or more of the anti -doping rule violations set forth in Art icle 2.1 through Article 2.1 1 of these Anti -Doping Rules. |
ARTICLE 2 ANTI -DOPING RULE VIOLATIONS The purpose of Article 2 is to specify the circumstances and conduct which constitute anti -doping rule violations. |
Hearings in doping cases will proceed based on the assertion that one or more of these specific rules have been violated. |
Athletes or other Persons shall be responsible for knowing what constitutes an anti -doping rule violation and the substances and methods which have been included on the Prohibi ted List . |
The following constitute anti -doping rule violations: 2.1 Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an Athlete’s Sample 2.1.1 It is the Athletes’ personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters their bodies. |
Athletes are responsible for any Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found to be present in their Samples . |
Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, Fault , Negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstr ated in order to es tablish an anti -doping rule violation under Article 2.1. |
2 2.1.2 Sufficient proof of an anti -doping rule violation under Article 2.1 is established by any of the following: presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in the Athlete’s A Sample where the Athlete waives analysis of the B Sample and the B Sample is not analyzed; or, where the Athlete... |
2.1.4 As an exception to the general rule of Article 2.1, the Prohibited List , Internat ional Standards or Technical Documents may establish special criteria for reporting or the evaluation of certain Prohibited Substances . |
2 [Comment to Article 2.1.1: An anti -doping rule violation is committed under this Article without regard to an Athlete’s Fault. |
This rule has been referred to in variou s CAS decisions as “Strict Liability”. |
A n Athlete’s Fault is taken into consideration in determining the Consequences of this anti -doping rule violation under Article 10. |
This principle has consistently been upheld by CAS.] |
3 [Comment to Article 2.1.2: T he Anti -Doping Organization with Results Management responsibility may, at its discretion, choose to have the B Sample analyzed even if the Athlete does not request the analysis of the B Sample.] |
IOF Anti-Doping Rules Page 7 of 66 2.2 Use or Attempted Use by an Athlete of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method 42.2.1 It is the Athletes’ personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters their bodies and that no Prohibited Method is Used . |
Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, Fault , Negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an anti- doping rule violation for Use of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method . |
2.2.2 The success or failure of the Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is not material. |
It is sufficient that the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method was Used or Attempted to be Used for an anti -doping rule violation to be committed.5 2.3 Evading, Refusing or Failing to Submit to Sample Collection by an Athlete Evading Sample collection; or refusing or failing to submit to Sample collection... |
2.5 Tampering or Attempted Tampering with any P art of Doping Control by an Athlete or Other Person 2.6 Possession of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method by an Athlete or Athlete Support Person 2.6.1 Possession by an Athlete In-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method, or ... |
As noted in the Comment to Article 3.2, unlike the proof required to establish an anti -doping rule violation under Article 2.1, Use or Attempted Use may also be established by other reliable means such as admissions by the Athlete, witness statements, documentary evidence, conclusions drawn from longitudinal profilin... |
For example, Use may be established based upon reliable analytical data from the analysis of an A Sample (wit hout confirmation from an analysis of a B Sample) or from the analysis of a B Sample alone where the Anti -Doping Organization provides a satisfactory explanation for the lack of confirmation in the other Sampl... |
5 [Comment to Article 2.2.2: Demonstrating the "Attempted Use" of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method requires proof of intent on the Athlete’s part. |
The fact that intent may be required to prove this particular anti -doping rule violation does not undermine the Strict Liability principl e established for violations of A rticle 2.1 and violations of Article 2.2 in respect of Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method. |
An Athlete’s Use of a Prohibited Substance constitutes an anti -doping rule violation unless such substance is not prohibited Out-of-Competition and the Athlete’s Use takes place Out -of-Competition. |
(However, the presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in a Sample collected In- Competition is a violation of Article 2.1 regardless of when that substance mig ht have been administered. )] |
6 [Comment to Article 2.3: For example, it would be an anti-d oping rule violation of “evading Sample collection” if it were established that an Athlete was deliberately avoiding a Doping Control official to evade notification or Testing. |
A violation of “failing to submit to Sample collection” may be based on either intentional or negligent conduct of the Athlet e, while “evading” or “refusing” Sample collection contemplates intentional conduct b y the Athle te.] |
IOF Anti-Doping Rules Page 8 of 66 Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method which is prohibited Out-of-Compet ition unless the Athlete establishes that the Possession is consistent with a Therapeutic Use Exemption (“TUE ”) granted in accordance with Article 4.4 or other acceptable justif ication. |
2.6.2 Possession by an Athlete Support Person In- Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method, or Possession by an Athlete Support Person Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method which is prohibited Out-of-Competition in connection with an Athlete, Competition... |
7 2.7 Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking in any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method by an Athlete or Other Person 2.8 Administration or Attempted Administration by an Athlete or Other Person to any Athlete In -Competition of any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method , or Administration or... |
The disqualifying status of such Person shall be in f orce for the longer of six (6) years from 7 [Comment to Articles 2.6.1 and 2.6.2: Acceptable justification would not include, for example, buying or Possessing a Prohibi ted Substance for purposes of giving it to a friend or relative, except under justifiable me... |
[Comment to Article 2.6.1 and 2.6.2: Acceptable justification may include, for example, (a) an Athlete or a team doctor carrying Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods for dealing with acute and emergency situations (e.g., an epinephrine auto- injector), or (b) an Athlete Possessing a Prohibited Substance or Prohi... |
8 [Comment to Article 2.9: Complicity or Attempted Complicity may include either physical or psychological assistance.] |
IOF Anti-Doping Rules Page 9 of 66 the criminal, professional or disciplinary decision or the duration of the criminal, disciplinary or professional sanction imposed; or 2.10.1.3 Is serving as a front or intermediary for an individual described in Article 2.10.1.1 or 2.10.1.2. |
2.10.2 To establish a violation of Article 2.10, an Anti -Doping Organization must establish that the Athlete or other Person knew of the Athlete Support Person’ s disqualifying status. |
The burden shall be on the Athlete or other Person to establish that any association with an Athlete Support Person described in Article 2.10.1.1 or 2.10.1.2 is not in a professional or sport -related capacity and/or that such asso ciation could not have been reasonably avoided. |
Anti-Doping Or ganizations that are aware of Athlete Support Personnel who meet the criteria described in Article 2.10.1.1, 2.10.1.2, or 2.10.1.3 shall submit that information to WADA.9 2.11 Acts by an Athlete or Other Person to Discourage or Retaliate Against Reportin g to Authorities Where such conduct does n... |
2.11.2 Retaliation against a Person who, in good faith, has provided evid ence or information that relates to an alleged anti -doping rule violation or alleged non-compliance with the Code to WADA, an Anti -Doping Organization, law enforcement, regulatory or professional disciplinary body, hearing body or Person condu... |
For purposes of Article 2.11, retaliation, threatening and intimidation include an act taken aga inst such Person either because the act lacks a good faith basis or is a disproportionate response.10 9 [Comment to Article 2.10: Athletes and other Persons must not work with coaches, trainers, physicians or other Athle... |
This also prohibits association with any other Athlete who is acting as a coach or At hlete Support Person while serving a period of Ineligibility. |
Some examples of the types of association which are prohibited include: obtai ning training, strategy, technique, nutrition or medical advice; obtaining therapy, treatment or presc riptions; provi ding any bodily products for analysis; or allowing the Athlete Support Person to serve as an agent or representative. |
Prohibited association need not involve any form of compensation. |
While Article 2.10 does not require the Anti -Doping Organization to not ify the Athlete or other Person about the Athlete Support Person’s disqualifying status, such notice , if provided, would be important evidence to establish that the Athlete or other Person knew about the disqualifying status of the Athlete S upp... |
10 [Comment to Article 2.11.2: This Article is intended to protect Persons who make good faith reports, and does not protect Persons who knowingly make false reports.] |
IOF Anti-Doping Rules Page 10 of 66 ARTICLE 3 PROOF OF DOPING 3.1 Burdens and Standards of Proof The IOF shall have the burden of establishing that an anti -doping rule violation has occur red. |
The standard of proof shall be whether the IOF has established an anti -doping rule violation to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel bearing in mind the serious ness of the allegation which is made. |
This standard of proof in all cases is greater than a mere balance of probability but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. |
Where these Anti -Doping Rules place the burden of proof upon the Athlete or other Person alleged to have committed an anti -doping rule violation to rebut a presumption or establish specified facts or circumstances, except as provided in Articles 3.2.2 and 3.2.3, the standard of proof shall be by a balance of probab... |
Any Athlete or other Person seeking to challenge whether the conditions for such presumption have been met or to rebut th is presumption of scientific validity shall, as a condition precedent to any such challenge, first notify WADA of the challenge and the basis of the challenge. |
The initial hearing body, appe llate body or CAS, on its own initiative, may also inform WADA of any such challenge. |
Within ten (10) days of WADA’s receipt of such notice and the case file related to such challenge, WADA shall also have the right to intervene as a party, appear as amicus curiae or otherwise provide evidence in such proceeding. |
In cases before CAS, at WADA’s request, the CAS panel sha ll appoint an appropriate scientific expert to assist the panel in its ev aluation of the challenge.13 3.2.2 WADA- accredited laboratories, and other laboratories approved by WADA, are presumed to have conducted Sample analysis and custodial procedures in ... |
Retaliation would not include an Anti -Doping Organization asserting in good faith an anti -doping rule violation against the reporting Person. |
For purposes of Article 2.11, a report is not made in good faith where the Person making the report knows the report to be false.] |
11 [Comment to Article 3.1: This standard of proof required to be met by the IOF is comparable to t he standard which is applied in most countries to cases involving professional misconduct.] |
12 [Comment to Article 3.2: For example the IOF may establish an anti -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,... |
13 [Comment to Article 3.2.1: For certain Prohibited Substances, WADA may instruct WADA -accredited laboratories not to report Samples as an Adverse Analytical Finding if the estimated concentration of the Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers is below a Minimum Reporting Level. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.