Datasets:
timotheeplanes
/
doping

Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
 Community
1
text
stringlengths
1
17.8k
Before taking such action, however, WADA will consult with World Archery and give WorldArchery an opportunity to explain why it has not yet rendered a decision.
]*C68* [Comment to Article 13.6: Whether governed by CAS rules or these Anti-Doping Rules, a party’s deadline to appeal does notbegin running until receipt of the decision.
For that reason, there can be no expiration of a party's right to appeal if the party has notreceived the decision.
]*C69* [Comment to Article 14.3.2: Where Public Disclosure as required by Article 14.3.2 would result in a breach of otherapplicable laws, World Archery’s failure to make the Public Disclosure will not result in a determination of non-compliance withCode as set forth in Article 4.1 of the International Standard for the...
]*C70* [Comment to Article 15.1.4: By way of example, where the rules of the Major Event Organization give the Athlete or otherPerson the option of choosing an expedited CAS appeal or a CAS appeal under normal CAS procedure, the final decision oradjudication by the Major Event Organization is binding on other Signatori...
]*C71* [Comment to Articles 15.1 and 15.2: Anti-Doping Organization decisions under Article 15.1 are implemented automatically byother Signatories without the requirement of any decision or further action on the Signatories’ part.
For example, when a NationalAnti- Doping Organization decides to Provisionally Suspend an Athlete, that decision is given automatic effect at the InternationalFederation level.
To be clear, the “decision” is the one made by the National Anti-Doping Organization, there is not a separatedecision to be made by the International Federation.
Thus, any claim by the Athlete that the Provisional Suspension was improperlyimposed can only be asserted against the National Anti-Doping Organization.
Implementation of Anti-Doping Organizations’decisions under Article 15.2 is subject to each Signatory’s discretion.
A Signatory’s implementation of a decision under Article 15.1or Article 15.2 is not appealable separately from any appeal of the underlying decision.
The extent of recognition of TUE decisions ofother Anti-Doping Organizations shall be determined by Article 4.4 and the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions.
]*C72* [Comment to Article 15.3: Where the decision of a body that has not accepted the Code is in some respects Code compliantand in other respects not Code compliant, World Archery, other Signatories and National Federations should attempt to apply thedecision in harmony with the principles of the Code.
For example, if in a process consistent with the Code a non-Signatory has foundan Athlete to have committed an anti-doping rule violation on account of the presence of a Prohibited Substance in the Athlete’s bodybut the period of Ineligibility applied is shorter than the period provided for in the Code, then World Arch...
World Archery or other Signatory’s implementation of a decision, or their decision not to implement a decision underArticle 15.3, is appealable under Article 13.
]*C73* [Comment to Article 20.2: With due regard to an Athlete’s human rights and privacy, legitimate anti-doping considerationssometimes require Sample collection late at night or early in the morning.
For example, it is known that some Athletes Use low dosesof EPO during these hours so that it will be undetectable in the morning.
]*C74* [Comment to Article 24.7.5: Other than the situation described in Article 24.7.5, where a final decision finding an anti-dopingrule violation has been rendered prior to the Effective Date and the period of Ineligibility imposed has been completely served, theseAnti-Doping Rules may not be used to re-characterize...
]*C75* [Comment to Definitions: Defined terms shall include their plural and possessive forms, as well as those terms used as otherparts of speech.
]*C76* [Comment to Athlete: Individuals who participate in sport may fall in one of five categories: 1) International-Level Athlete, 2)National-Level Athlete, 3) individuals who are not International- or National-Level Athletes but over whom the InternationalFederation or National Anti-Doping Organization has chosen to...
All International-and National-Level Athletes are subject to the anti-doping rules of the Code, with the precise definitions of international and nationallevel sport to be set forth in the anti-doping rules of the International Federations and National Anti-Doping Organizations.
]*C77* [Comment to Fault: The criteria for assessing an Athlete’s degree of Fault is the same under all Articles where Fault is to beconsidered.
However, under Article 10.6.2, no reduction of sanction is appropriate unless, when the degree of Fault is assessed, theconclusion is that No Significant Fault or Negligence on the part of the Athlete or other Person was involved.
]*C78* [Comment to International-Level Athlete: Consistent with the International Standard for Testing and Investigations, WorldArchery is free to determine the criteria it will use to classify Athletes as International-Level Athletes, e.g., by ranking, byVersion 2021-01-05 17:15:34 Page 38 / 39participation in particu...
However, it must publish those criteria in clear and conciseform, so that Athletes are able to ascertain quickly and easily when they will become classified as International-Level Athletes.
Forexample, if the criteria include participation in certain International Events, then the International Federation must publish a list ofthose International Events.
]*C79* [Comment to Possession: Under this definition, anabolic steroids found in an Athlete's car would constitute a violation unlessthe Athlete establishes that someone else used the car; in that event, World Archery must establish that, even though the Athlete didnot have exclusive control over the car, the Athlete k...
The act of purchasing a Prohibited Substance alone constitutes Possession, even where, for example, the productdoes not arrive, is received by someone else, or is sent to a third party address.
]*C80* [Comment to Protected Person: The Code treats Protected Persons differently than other Athletes or Persons in certaincircumstances based on the understanding that, below a certain age or intellectual capacity, an Athlete or other Person may notpossess the mental capacity to understand and appreciate the prohibit...
This would include,for example, a Paralympic Athlete with a documented lack of legal capacity due to an intellectual impairment.
The term “opencategory” is meant to exclude competition that is limited to junior or age group categories.
]*C81* [Comment to Provisional Hearing: A Provisional Hearing is only a preliminary proceeding which may not involve a fullreview of the facts of the case.
Following a Provisional Hearing, the Athlete remains entitled to a subsequent full hearing on themerits of the case.
By contrast, an “expedited hearing”, as that term is used in Article 7.4.3, is a full hearing on the merits conductedon an expedited time schedule.
]*C82* [Comment to Recreational Athlete: The term “open category” is meant to exclude competition that is limited to junior or agegroup categories.]
*C83* [Comment to Sample or Specimen: It has sometimes been claimed that the collection of blood Samplesviolates the tenets of certain religious or cultural groups.
It has been determined that there is no basis for any such claim.]
*C84*[Comment to Tampering: For example, this Article would prohibit altering identification numbers on a Doping Control form duringTesting, breaking the B bottle at the time of B Sample analysis, altering a Sample by the addition of a foreign substance, orintimidating or attempting to intimidate a potential witness or...
Tampering includes misconduct which occurs during the Results Management process.
See Article 10.9.3.3.However, actions taken as part of a Person's legitimate defense to an anti-doping rule violation charge shall not be consideredTampering.
Offensive conduct towards a Doping Control official or other Person involved in Doping Control which does nototherwise constitute Tampering shall be addressed in the disciplinary rules of sport organizations.
]Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)Version 2021-01-05 17:15:34 Page 39 / 39
International Sport Federation (IF) recogni zed by the International Olympic Committee WBF ANTI -DOPING RULES Adopted on 17th July 2020 Come into force on 1 January 2021 WBF 2021 Anti -Dopin g Rules Page 2 of 67 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................ .....
These Anti -Doping Rules are sport rul es 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 req uirements and legal standards applicable 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 cou rts, arbitral tribunals and other 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 , WBF shall be responsible for conducting all aspects of Doping Control .
Any aspect of Doping Control or anti -doping Education may be delegated by WBF to a Delegate d Third Party , such as the International Testing Agency (ITA) , however, WBF shall require the Delegated Third Party to perform such aspects in compliance with the Code , International Standards , and these Anti -Doping ...
WBF may delegate its adjudication responsibilities and /or certain Results Management responsibilities to the CAS Anti -Doping Division (CAS ADD) .
When WBF has delegated its responsibilities to implement part or all of Doping Control to the ITA or to other Delegated Third Part y, any refere nce to WBF in these Rules should be inte nded as a reference to the ITA or to the other Delegated Third Party , where applicable and within the context of the aforemen...
WBF shall always remain fully responsible for ensuring that any delegate d aspects are performed in compliance with the Code .
Italicized terms in these Anti -Doping Rules are defined in Appendix 1 .
Unless otherwise specified, references to Articles are references to Articles of these Anti -Doping Rules.
Fundamental Rationa le for the Code and WBF '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 e ach 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 Methods .
Anti-doping programs seek to maintai n the integrity of sport in terms of respect for 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 WBF 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 4 of 67  Athletes’ rights as set forth in the Code  Excellence in performance  Character and Education  Fun and joy  Teamwo...
Doping is fundamentally contrary to the spirit of sport.
Scope of these Anti -Doping Rules Thes e Anti -Doping Rules shall apply to: (a) WBF , 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 , includi ng th...
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 ha ve submitted to the authority of WBF to enforce these Anti -Doping Rules, including any Consequences for the breach thereof, and...
Rather, such Person would WBF 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 5 of 67 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 purpose s of these Anti-Doping Rules...
ARTICLE 1 DEFINITION OF DOPING Doping is defined as the occurrence of one or more of the anti -doping rule violations set forth in Article 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 co nduct 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 an ti-doping rule violation and the substances and methods which have been included on the Prohibited List .
The following constitute anti -doping rule violations: only be subject to discipline for a violation of Code Articles 2.5 (Tam pering), 2.7 (Trafficking), 2.8 (A...
Furthermore, such Person would be subject to the addition al roles and responsibilities according to Code Article 21.3.
Also, the oblig ation to require an employee to be bound by the Code is subject to applicable law.
WBF shall ensure that, as per Article 19 of these Anti -Doping Rules, any arrangements with their board members, directors, officers, and specified employees , as well as wit h the Delegated Third Parties and their employees – either employment, contractual or otherwise – have explicit provisions incorporated accordin...
WBF 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 6 of 67 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 tha t intent, Fault , Negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish 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 t he 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 A...
2.1.4 As an exception to the general rule of Article 2.1, the Prohibited List , International Standards or Technical Documents may establish special criteria for reporting or the evaluation of certain Prohibited Substances .
2.2 Use or Attempted Use by an Athlete of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method 4 2.2.1 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 , Neglig ence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part 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 various CAS decisions as “Strict Liability”.
An Athlet e’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: The Anti -Doping Organization with Results Managem ent 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.]
4 [Comment to Article 2.2: It has always been the case that Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method may be established by any reliable means.
As noted in the Comment to Article 3.2, unlike the proof required to establish an a nti-doping rule violation under Article 2.1, Use or Attempted Use may also be established by other reliable m eans such as admissions by the Athlete, witness statements, documentary evidence, conclusions drawn from longitudinal profili...
For example, Use may be established based upon reliable analytical data from the analysis of an A Sample (without 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...
WBF 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 7 of 67 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 colle...
2.5 Tampering or Attempted Tampering with any Part 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 ...
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 , Compe...
The fact that intent may be required to prove this particular anti -doping rule violation does not undermine the Strict Liability principle established for violations of Article 2.1 and v iolations 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 U se 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 might have been administered.)]
6 [Comm ent to Article 2.3: Errore.
Solo documento principale.
For example, it would be an anti -doping rule violation of “evading Sample collection” if it were established that an Athlete was deliberately avoiding a Doping Control official to evade notifi cation or Testing.
A v iolation of “failing to submit to Sample collection” may be based on either intentional or negligent conduct of the Athlete, while “evading” or “refusing” Sample collection contemplates intentional conduct by the Athlete.]
WBF 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 8 of 67 Possession is consistent with a TUE granted to an Athlete in accordance with Article 4.4 or other acceptable justification.
7 2.7 Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking in any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method by an Athlete or Other Person 2.8 Administration or Attempt ed Administration by an Athlete or Other Person to any Athlete In -Competiti on of any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method , or Administration or...