Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Community support plan to combat doping in sport'
Date: 2000-05-24
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU action, ethics, performance drugs, public health, sport

18.7.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 204/45

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the Commission
to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee
of the Regions: Community support plan to combat doping in sport’

(2000/C 204/10)

On 7 December 1999 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned communication.

The Section for Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship, instructed to prepare the proceedings of the
Committee, adopted its opinion on 5 May 2000. The rapporteur was Mr Bedossa.

At its 373rd plenary session of 24 and 25 May 2000 (meeting of 24 May 2000), the Economic and Social
Committee adopted by the following opinion by 112 votes to 0, with 3 abstentions.

1. Preamble

Because of the globalisation of sport, the public has
1.1.
recently become aware of doping as an immoral social and
cultural aberration that is harmful to health, and is afraid that
it will become general practice. The public and sporting
authorities have reacted responsibly to the public’s demand
for guarantees to ensure that sport respects ethical standards
and the health of those who indulge in it.

Since sport is so idealised, and the image it conveys is
1.2.
one of perfect physical health, the doping phenomenon has of
course been under-estimated at a time when its economic,
social and cultural impact has become huge.

1.3.
In addition, the fight against doping — despite some
substantial gains — gives the impression, all too often, of
being brittle and unfocused. No doubt this is because it is now
perceived and presented as an immediate and insufficiently co-
ordinated response to a complex problem, when the only way
to fight this scourge effectively seems to be through a rigorous,
permanent and universal system.

1.4.
It is quite obvious that an effort must be made on the
conceptual and organisational side. The roles and responsibilit-
ies of the two main partners — the public authorities and the
sporting authorities — must be redefined or even institutional-
ised in an area which is no longer an exclusively national one,
which must include associations, companies and sports clubs
and which takes into account not only the dictates of
competition schedules but also, and above all, the need to
protect the health of sportspeople.

draws attention to a problem that has become very serious in
the public’s mind following the discovery that doping is almost
general practice in certain sporting events(1).

2.2.
This repeated violation of sporting ethics is causing
European public opinion to have doubts about the authenticity
of well-known — and especially international — sporting
events, most of which take place on European soil. The massive
media coverage of these sporting activities is amplifying this
phenomenon.

2.3.
In addition, the intervention of such powerful forces
throws into relief the role of the financial interests which make
it possible to take over and develop these sporting events: but
the public’s love affair is likely to gradually turn sour or even
end completely unless strong, co-ordinated measures, accepted
by the principal parties, are taken rapidly so that this cheating
— which doping is — can be tackled effectively at all levels:
national, European and international.

forums.

2.4.
The role of the European Union here is essential,
because the countries which make it up are of sufficient
importance to be listened to and followed in all the inter-
national
the
European Union speaks with one voice and that it defines its
missions by adopting a recommendation that meets with the
approval of the main parties concerned: federations, sporting
movements, supervisory authorities and the communities of
non-governmental organisations which govern the sport.

is therefore absolutely vital

that

It

2.

Introduction

2.1.
The Economic and Social Committee (ESC) welcomes
the initiative taken by the Commission. The Communication

(1) On 11 November 1999, the European Group on Ethics in Science
and New Technologies adopted a highly detailed opinion on the
ethical aspects of doping in sport which gave an exact definition
of doping, which the ESC cannot but endorse:
‘the use of
substances, dosages or methods with the intention of enhancing
sporting performance, which are banned mainly because they
may have a harmful effect on sportsmen/women’s health and
which may compromise the generally accepted conditions of fair
play’.

C 204/46

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

18.7.2000

2.5.
Action by the EU is indispensable, not only because
the fight against doping is a question of ethics but also, and
above all, because it is of vital importance to public health.

3.1.2.
EGE’s main proposals, which include:

The Commission Communication reiterates

the

2.6.
The Economic and Social Committee is very sensitive
to the Commission’s request for an opinion, because the ESC’s
responsibility as the representative of civil society is full and
complete: the network of associations that promote sport is
heavily involved in the present discussion and always pays a
great deal of attention to the opinions of the ESC, whose
members include a number of personalities who are active in
this field.

— setting up an efficient health monitoring system indepen-

dent of the sports movement;

— setting up a European laboratory of reference;

— promoting epidemiological research;

— organising a major conference on doping;

3. General Comments on the Commission’s Communi-

cation

— introducing specific clauses on the protection of sports-
persons into EU texts on the health and safety of workers;

After recalling the various recent stages in the
3.0.1.
fight against doping at international and European level, the
Commission stresses the leading role of the EU, in particular
regarding the Council of Europe’s 1989 European Anti-doping
Convention.

The ESC notes,

3.0.2.
like the Commission, the recent
change in the nature of doping. It agrees with the reasons cited
by the Commission to explain the increase in doping: excessive
commercialism in sport, the proliferation of competitions and
the environment surrounding the sportsperson.

The Commission adopts a three-pronged approach
3.0.3.
to combating doping, aiming first of all to give priority to
ethics and to improving health protection for sportspersons,
then to establish a new partnership with the International
Olympic Committee (IOC) by setting up the World Anti-
Doping Agency, and finally to mobilise the Community’s own
instruments.

The ESC is pleased that the Commission mentions,
3.0.4.
in its reflections, the need to take into account both ‘sporting
ethics’ and ‘sportspersons’ health’. It also approves the Com-
mission’s numerous references to recent key documents which
set out the positions of the European Parliament and the
Committee of the Regions on the fight against doping.

— drawing up a directive on the protection of children and
adolescents in sport in order to safeguard their health and
guarantee their autonomy;

— promotion by the EU of specialist

training in sports

medicine;

— developing a code of good conduct

in the field of
sports medicine, in liaison with the supervisory authorities
responsible for upholding such a code in those professions.

3.1.3.
The ESC welcomes the Commission’s efforts to
sound out experts’ views on the ethical, legal and scientific
implications of doping.

3.1.4.
It feels that a follow-up group should be formed
rapidly to track the Commission’s proposals — which are of
particular interest — in order to see that the ethical principles
identified by the EGE are respected and ensure that they are
implemented over time.

3.1.5.
The ESC will be vigilant in seeing that the measures
proposed by the Commission take account of these various
proposals, which it will certainly add to later.

3.1. Sporting ethics and the protection of sportspersons’ health

3.2. Towards a partnership between the European Union and the

World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)

3.1.1.
After recalling the ethical principles of: the right to
health, the principle of integrity, the need to protect persons
at risk and the dignity of sportspersons, the European Group
on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (EGE) (1) reaffirms
that doping is a serious threat to public health.

(1) Opinion of the EGE on the Ethical Aspects arising from Doping

in Sport (11.11.1999).

3.2.1.
Participation in the World Anti-Doping Agency
(WADA) is the second strand of the Community’s action. The
Commission’s Communication rightly points out that the EU
has a clear interest in helping to set up the agency, especially
since several tasks to be entrusted to this new institution
concern areas that come under the EU’s terms of reference, for
example the protection of public health, research and the free
movement of sportspersons.

18.7.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 204/47

3.2.2.
The new partnership described by the Commission
is essential to stepping up the fight against doping: sports
organisations, the Olympic movement and the public auth-
orities have to commit themselves resolutely. The EU has to
make its presence felt,
join in the action and share its
knowledge in order for this international authority to succeed,
while at the same time guaranteeing that the principles of
independence and operational transparency are respected.

3.2.3.
The ESC wholeheartedly approves the EU’s involve-
ment in the creation of the World Anti-Doping Agency. It is
pleased that the EU has been highly favourable towards the
setting-up of this body right from the start of the negotiations.

Nevertheless, the ESC asks the Commission to be
3.2.4.
watchful and vigilant during the transitional period up to
1 January 2002 as regards the following points, on which no
definite position has yet been adopted.

— The draft statute of

the WADA must be completely
finalised and accepted by all, and spell out the vital
importance of the parties concerned being morally and
politically committed to supporting the agency’s activities.

— The WADA has to remain the sole entity responsible for
the classification of prohibited doping substances and
practices, basing itself as far as possible on the list drawn
up by the IOC Medical Commission. The ESC asks that the
WADA’s position as ultimate authority here be guaranteed.

— The WADA must organise the accreditation and certifi-
cation of test laboratories in order to implement the rules
laid down by the international sporting movement.

— The WADA must remain responsible for drafting the guide
for the proper implementation of controls during and
outside competitions.

— The WADA must seek a consensus between government
or public sector organisations and the sporting world.

— The ESC urges national anti-doping agencies to co-operate

closely with the WADA.

The ESC will keep a close eye on the final choice of
3.2.5.
the WADA’s headquarters, which should remain in Europe,
where the most important initiatives have been taken and
where the greatest amount and the most relevant work has
been carried out. It supports the Commission’s proposal to
change the status of the WADA and make it a public-law
agency, rather than a private-law foundation.

3.3. Mobilisation of Community instruments

3.3.1.
In its Community support plan, the Commission
calls for better co-ordination of regulatory measures (freedom
of movement, freedom to provide services ...) and the mobilis-
ation of Community instruments in the fight against doping,
through such steps as:

— research into doping substances, detection methods and
the health impact of doping: the fifth framework pro-
gramme of the Council (1998-2002) for research, techno-
logical development and demonstration activities has direct
relevance to doping through its ‘competitive and sustain-
able growth’ and ‘quality of life’ programmes.

The Commission points out in its Communication that
several research priorities are to be considered as research
of a medical and metrological nature. The ESC approves
this approach which makes it possible, through Com-
munity research policy in particular, to take concrete steps
such as the development of a confidential study to
monitor the health of current high-level athletes and an
epidemiological study of former top-level sportsmen and
women who have retired.

— Education, vocational training and youth programmes may
contribute to the war on doping through awareness-
raising, prevention and information: the Socrates pro-
gramme on education,
the Leonardo programme on
vocational training and the future ‘Youth’ programme
concerning co-operation in the field of youth (training of
youth leaders, exchanges of young people...).

It is quite clear to the ESC that the projects relating to
research, prevention by education, training and infor-
mation in the fight against doping and in protecting
sportspersons’ health should be decentralised and use
made of the various existing Community instruments.
These can easily be incorporated into the existing general
programmes by adapting them to take account of the
problems involved in fighting doping and protecting
health, or even supplement some of the programmes
which are targeted more on other sectors (such as drug
addiction).

— Police and judicial co-operation programmes such as Oisin
(1996) for the law enforcement authorities and Grotius
(1996) for magistrates, through the use of internships,
training and exchanges of information.

— Directive No 92/27/EEC (1) of 31 March 1992 on the
labelling of medicinal products could be used as a frame-
work for action to issue certain special warnings for certain
categories of medicines, particularly those containing
substances that are banned in sport.

The ESC asks the Commission to submit a proposal
3.2.6.
for EU participation in the WADA rapidly to Parliament and
the Council of Ministers.

(1) OJ L 113, 30.4.1992.

C 204/48

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

18.7.2000

— The Commission intends to use Article 152 of the Treaty
as a basis for submitting a proposal
for a Council
Recommendation on the prevention of doping in sport,
particularly amateur sport. Member States are invited to
submit a report on the adoption and implementation of
measures taken in the various fields covered by the
recommendation (prevention, awareness-raising, etc.). The
new framework Public Health Action Plan will have to
include a chapter on doping.

The ESC considers that the implementation of
laws and
regulations on combating and preventing doping involves
three inseparable aspects. These are sporting ethics, punishing
those involved in doping networks and protecting the health
of sportspersons. The public authorities in the Member States
and the European Union are directly concerned by the
construction of this three-point plan for effectively preventing
the use of doping practices and combating them when they do
occur.

3.3.2.
The ESC approves the idea of ‘mobilising’ existing
Community instruments for the purpose of preventing and
fighting against doping. It nevertheless has two major reser-
vations, the first specifically concerning the ‘health’ aspect
proposed by the Commission, and the second of a more
general nature.

3.3.2.1.
The ESC is aware that Article 152 of the Treaty
does not provide for any harmonisation of the laws and
regulations on health, but it trusts that the Member States will
amplify and co-ordinate national health measures as regards
doping.

3.3.2.2.
The ESC also regrets that the main plank in the
prevention and anti-doping policy proposed by the EU is
limited to the mobilisation of existing Community instru-
for a more consistent and
ments. The stakes here call
comprehensive political plan,
incorporating such essential
aspects as disciplinary action against sportspersons, which is
hardly touched on by the Commission.

4. The proposals of the ESC’s draft opinion

In order to increase the impact of a Community support plan
to combat and prevent doping in sport, the ESC considers that:

— The phenomenon of doping in sport, as recent events have
shown, has become a matter of the gravest concern in all
areas of sport, at all levels, both professional and amateur,
and for all sections of the population, especially young
people.

— It endangers the health of sportspersons, falsifies compe-
titions, harms the image of sport, particularly among
young people, and seriously undermines the ethical dimen-
sion of sport.

— This worsening of the situation is made easier by gaps in
the laws and regulations of a large number of states on
combating and preventing doping, and by poor co-
ordination of the policies to combat doping pursued by
the various Member States of the international sporting
community, particularly the states of the EU.

4.1. Sporting ethics

4.1.1. D i s c i p l i n a r y

s p o r t s -
p e r s o n s c o n v i c t e d o f d o p i n g p r a c t i c e s

a g a i n s t

a c t i o n

The Commission is clearly cautious about

4.1.1.1.
the
punishment aspect of enforcing sporting ethics among sports-
persons. Historically, the punishment of sportspersons is a
matter for the sporting bodies. The involvement of the public
authorities, particularly those of the Member States, has only
been secondary and currently varies greatly from one country
to another.

4.1.1.2.
There is a request from the European Parliament
(item 10 of the resolution) (1) and the Committee of the
Regions (item 3.14.2 of its opinion) (2) to update the disciplin-
ary side and involve the public authorities more deeply. The
ESC asks the Commission to align itself on this position.

4.1.1.3.
Experience has shown how fragile this aspect is
when it forms part of a sporting jurisdiction that is isolated by
the absence of a regulatory framework laid down by the public
authorities. Those having jurisdiction over such matters in
sport have often proved to be not up to the job when it comes
to punishing their own sportspeople, which tends to discredit
the fight against doping.

4.1.1.4. Without going so far as to work out a detailed
structure for disciplining sportspersons convinced of doping
offences, two ‘models’ are possible. The first would be modelled
on the French set-up, which brings into play firstly the sporting
federations, and secondly an administrative authority with
regulatory powers that is independent both of the sporting
movement and of the political authorities — the Council
for the Prevention and Combating of Doping (Conseil de
Prévention et de Lutte contre le Dopage).

The second would entrust an independent authority with full
responsibility for prosecuting and punishing sportspersons
convicted of doping offences.

In both cases a partnership, or at least co-operation, between
such a body and the sporting movement is essential. Whichever
solution is chosen, it is essential that the sportsperson’s rights
are strictly respected.

— Thought must be given to standardising the measures and
action taken by national legislative bodies, the European
institutions,
the Council of Europe and the sporting
movement as a whole, both European and international.

(1) Resolution of the European Parliament on the urgent measures to

be taken against doping in sport — OJ C 98, 9.4.1999.

(2) COR opinion on ‘The European Model of Sport’, CdR 37/99 of

16 September 1999.

18.7.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 204/49

4.1.1.5.
The ESC considers that a Community directive
could encourage the birth of such bodies in each Member State
legislation on
and encourage the adoption of consistent
punishments.

4.2.4.
The ESC recommends laying down rules on the
manufacture, importation or sale of prohibited substances and
the Member States as regards
harmonising the laws of
punishing those in close or distant contact with the sports-
person.

4.1.1.6.
It is also essential to remember that this disciplinary
stage must be kept quite separate from the penal aspect; some
Member States currently do not draw such a distinction.

4.1.2. T h e I O C c o d e

4.1.2.1.
The ESC notes the application of the IOC’s state-
ment on combating doping. The IOC’s code is an important
step in the fight against doping, in particular in making the
development of the Olympic Games, like those of Sydney,
credible, or even exemplary. This code is now a legal and
moral reference that cannot be ignored, and its impact on
Olympic sport can only be positive. The combating of doping
during Olympic competitions must be improved by it.

The ESC welcomes the recent efforts of the IOC
4.1.2.2.
which invited the EU to take a more active part by co-operating
closely in the preparations for the Sydney games.

4.1.2.3. While the ESC respects the independence of the
Olympic movement, it notes that the IOC’s anti-drugs code,
which came into force on 1 January 2000, is an autonomous
code subject only to the authority of the IOC and its national
committees. The EU is only present through the presence of
the designated representatives of the Member States.

4.2. Punishing those involved in doping networks

4.2.1.
The Commission considers the role of the public
authorities of the Member States in controlling and monitoring
prohibited products solely from the point of view of an
unavoidable co-operation with the police and legal authorities.

4.2.2.
The ESC supports any strengthening of co-operation
between the Member States in sensitive areas such as these, for
example with an eye to aligning national rules defining
to be applied or the
offences,
importance of punishments being harmonised in a territorial
area where people and goods circulate freely.

the level of punishment

It is obvious that those people around the sports-
4.2.3.
person who can facilitate access to doping substances, encour-
age their use, supply or administer them must be punished in
the same way as the manufacture,
importation or sale of
preparations containing prohibited substances, since this
insidious method of supplying illicit products is becoming
commonplace.

The ESC would point out here that

the fifteen
4.2.5.
Member States of the European Union are among the signa-
tories to the Council of Europe’s 1989 European Anti-doping
Convention. These states are therefore bound by the list
defining prohibited doping substances and methods drawn up
by the IOC follow-up group and incorporated into the 1989
Council of Europe Convention by amendment. This list is
therefore the same for all the Member States of the European
Union. It is wise for each state to use a reference obtained
through mutual recognition.

4.3. Protecting the health of sportspersons

4.3.1.
The ESC considers the protection of sportspersons’
health as one of the priority objectives of combating and
preventing doping.

To this end,

4.3.2.
it recommends an active policy of
providing clear, sure, precise and up-to-date information to
athletes tempted to use doping substances or methods. It must
be obligatory for such information to be brought to the
attention of sportspersons when they sign or renew their
licences.

In addition,

4.3.3.
the ESC thinks there should be a
compulsory medical supervision scheme for top-level sports-
persons worked out jointly by the public authorities and the
sports movement. This supervision must be based on suitable
technical foundations. It is also essential to set up a network
of correspondents who are independent of
the sporting
movement and who are capable of analysing the findings of
this scheme and drawing up rules to protect the health of
sportspersons, based on the analyses carried out.

Such medical supervision has to be regarded as a
4.3.4.
vital protection against the health consequences of using
prohibited products and indulging in sport in an uncontrolled
way. It is also one way of making sports medicine a major
medical speciality which must not have the search for ever-
higher performance as its sole objective.

5. General conclusion

In presenting its ‘Community support plan to combat doping
in sport’, the Commission has put the emphasis on setting out
the means developed by the sporting movement alongside
existing Community means.

C 204/50

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

18.7.2000

the Regions,

But the ESC was expecting, as an extension to the reports and
opinions drawn up by the European Parliament and the
the construction of a basic
Committee of
Community system that would be the framework for a
structured fight against doping and protection of sports-
persons’ health by the public authorities of the Member States.
Such an approach would have made it possible to set out the
guidelines for a European body of measures aimed at pre-
venting and fighting against doping and based on three pillars:

— the development

and harmonisation of

repressive
measures covering both disciplinary action against sports-
persons convicted of a doping offence and penal measures
against those involved in doping networks: the essential
elements of such a policy of prevention and fighting
against doping would be a reorganisation of the sporting
world based on the principle of independence as regards
tests and sanctions, police and legal co-operation between
Member States and the harmonisation of laws;

— the creation of a genuine, active Community policy of
prevention. This prevention policy would have to mobilise
all the actors in the fight against doping: amateur and
professional sporting authorities, those who are active in
the sector of education, youth and sport,
independent
administrative authorities, non-governmental organis-
ations, communities, the health professions and the media;

— a continuation and stepping-up of medical and pharmaco-
logical research, both at theoretical and clinical level: the
success of a policy of prevention and fighting against
doping will depend on all available resources in the
research sector being mobilised. The guiding thread of this
policy would be application of the precautionary principle
and the overwhelming necessity to protect sportspersons’
health.

Brussels, 24 May 2000.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Beatrice RANGONI MACHIAVELLI