Datasets:

timotheeplanes

/

doping

like 0

Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE): A Therapeutic Use Exemption allows an Athlete with a medical condition to Use a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method , but only if the conditions set out in Article 4.4 and the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions are met.

Trafficking : Selling, giving, transporting, sending, del ivering 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 or any other Person subject to the authority of an Anti-Doping Organization to any third party; provided, however, this definition shall not include the actions of bona fide medical personnel involving a Prohibited Substance used for genuine and legal therapeutic purposes or other acceptable justification, and shall not include actions involving Prohibited Substances which are not prohibited in Out-of-Competition Testing unless the circumstances as a whole demonstrate such Prohibited Substances are not intended for genuine an d legal therapeutic purposes or are intended to enhance sport performance.

UNESCO Convention : The International Convention against Doping in Sport adopted by the 33rd session of the UNESCO General Conference on 19 October 2005 including any and all amend ments adopted by the States Parties to the Convention and the Conference of Parties to the International Convention against Doping in Sport.

Use: The utilization, application, ingestion, injection or consumption by any means whatsoever of any Prohibited S ubstance or Prohibited Method .

WADA : The World Anti -Doping Agency.

Without Prejudice Agreement : For purposes of Articles 10.7.1.1 and 10.8.2, a written agreement between an Anti-Doping Organization and an Athlete or other Person that allows the Athlete or other Person to provide information to the Anti-Doping Organization in a defined time -limited setting with the understanding that, if an agreement for Substantial Assistance or a case resolution agreement is not finalized, the information provided by the Athlete or other Person in this particular setting may not be used by the Anti-Doping Organization against the Athlete or other Person in any Results Management proceeding under the Code , and that the information provided by the Anti-Doping Organization in this particular setting may not be used by the Athlete or other Person against the Anti-Doping Organization in any Results Management proceeding under the Code .

Such an agreement shall not preclude the Anti-Doping Organization , Athlete or other Person from using any information or evidence gathered from any source other than during the specific time -limited setting described in the agreement.

WT ANTI -DOPING RULES IN COMPLIANCE WITH 2021 WADA CODE WT 2021 Anti-Doping Rules : Table of Contents Introduction Preface , Fundamental Rationale for the Code, and Scope 4 Article 1 Definition of Doping 6 Article 2 WT Anti-Doping Rule Violations 6 Article 3 Proof of Doping 10 Article 4 The Prohibited List 13 Article 5 Testing and Investigations 17 Article 6 Analysis of Samples 22 Article 7 Results Management : Responsibility, Initial Review, Notice and Provisional Suspensions 24 Article 8 Results Management: Right to a Fair Hearing and Notice of Hearing Decision 27 Article 9 Automatic Disqualification of Individual Results 30 Article 10 Sanctions on Individuals 30 Article 11 Consequences to Team s 43 Article 12 Sanctions by WT Against Other Sporting Bodies 43 Article 13 Results Management: Appeals 45 Article 14 Confidentiality & Reporting 49 Article 15 Implementation of Decisions 53 Article 16 Statute of Limitations 55 Article 17 Education 55 Article 18 Additional Roles and Responsibilities of MNAs 55 Article 1 9 Additional Roles and Responsibilities of WT 56 Article 20 Additional Roles and Responsibilities of Athletes 57 Article 21 Additional Roles and Responsibilities of Athlete Support Personnel 57 Article 22 Additional Roles and Responsibilities of Other Persons Subject to these Anti -Doping Rules 58 Article 23 Interpretation of the Code 58 WT 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 2 Article 24 Final Provisions 59 Appendix 1 Definitions A61-68 WT 2021 Anti -Doping Rules Page 3 Enacted: December 18, 1990 Amended: July 15, 2002 Amended: August 5, 2004 Amended: September 27, 2007 Amended: July 4, 2008 Amended: April 2, 2012 Amended: January 1, 2015 Amended : December 5, 2019 Amended: October 6, 2020 (Come into force on 1 January 2021) © World Taekwondo Published by the World Taekwondo WT 2021 Anti-Doping Rules 4 INTRODUCTION Preface On October 7, 2003, the World Taekwondo (“WT”) accepted the World Anti -Doping Code (“Code ”) and enacted the WT Anti -Doping Rules (“Anti -Doping Rules”).

These Anti -Doping Rules are adopted and implemented in accordance with WT's responsibilities under the Code , and in furtherance of WT's continuing efforts to eradicate doping in sport.

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 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 courts, 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 the world as to what is necessary to protect and ensure fair sport.

As provided in the Code , WT shall be responsible for conducting all aspects of Doping Control .

Any aspect of Doping Control or anti -doping Education may be delegated by WT to a Delegated Third Party , such as the International Testing Agency (ITA) , however, WT shall require the Delegated Third Party to perform such aspects in compliance with the Code , International Standards , and these Anti -Doping Rules.

WT may delegate its adjudication and Results Management responsibilities to the CAS Anti -Doping Division (CAS ADD) .

When WT has delegated its responsibilities to implement part or all of Doping Control to the ITA or to another Delegated Third Part y, any reference to WT in these Rules should be intended as a reference to the ITA or the other Delegated Third Party , where applicable and within the context of the aforementioned delegation .

WT shall always remain fully 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 these Anti -Doping Rules.

Fundamental Rationale for the Code and WT'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 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 v alues we find in and through sport, including: • Health • Ethics, fair play and honesty WT 2021 Anti-Doping Rules 5 • Athletes’ rights as set forth in the Code • Excellence in performance • Character and Education • Fun and joy • Teamwork • Dedication and commitment • Respect for rules and laws • Respect for self and other Participants • Courage • Community and solidarity The spirit of sport is expressed in how we play true.

Doping is fundamentally contrary to the spirit of sport.

Scope of these Anti -Doping Rules These Anti -Doping Rules shall appl y to: (a) WT, 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 Member National Association s (MNA s), including their board members, directors, officers and specified employees , and Delegated Third Parties and their employees, who are involved in any aspect of Doping Control .

Every MNA must guarantee that its Athletes participating in WT International Events accept to be bound by all of WT’s rules, including these Anti -Doping Rules comp iled in accordance with the Code .

It is the responsibility of every MNA to ensure that all national -level Testing on the MNA ’s Athletes comply with these Anti -Doping Rules ; (c) the following Athletes , Athlete Support Personnel and other Persons : (i) all Athletes and Athlete Support Personnel who are members of WT, or of any MNA , or of any member or affiliate organization of any MNA (including any clubs, teams, associations, or leagues) ; (ii) all Athletes and Athlete Support Personnel who participate in such capacity in Events , Competitions and other activities organized, convened, authorized or recognized by WT, or any MNA , or by any member or affiliate organization of any MNA (including any clubs, teams, associations, or leagues) , wherever held; (iii) any other Athlete or Athlete Support Personnel or other Person who, by virtue of an accreditation, a license or other contractual arrangement, or otherwise, is subject to the authority of WT, or of any MNA , or of any member or affiliate organization of any MNA (including any clubs, teams, ass ociations, or leagues), for purposes of anti -doping; and (iv) Athletes who are not regular members of WT or of one of its MNA s but who want to be eligible to compete in a particular International Event .

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 authority of WT to enforce these Anti -Doping Rules, including any Consequences for the breach thereof, WT 2021 Anti-Doping Rules 6 and to the jurisdiction of the hearing panels specified in Article 8 and Article 13 to hear and determine cases and appeals brought under these Anti -Doping Rules .1 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, and, therefore, the specific provisions in these Anti -Doping Rules applicable to International -Level Athletes (e.g., Testing , TUEs , whereabouts, and Results Management ) shall apply to such Athletes : (a) Athletes included in the WT Registered Testing Pool , Testing Pool and any other pool if established by WT; (b) Athletes who hold the following license: Global Athletes Licen ce (GAL) which can be given to Athletes who compete to Events organized by WT or where WT is the ruling body (i.e.

all the Events included in the WT’s international calendar published on the WT’s website at the following link: http://www.worldtaekwondo.org/calendar/) .

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 WT 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 meth ods which have been included on the Prohibited 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 1 [Comment: Where the Code requires a Person other than an Athlete or Athlete Support Person to be bound by the Code, such Person would of course not be subject to Sample collection or Testing, and would not be charged with an anti -doping rule violation unde r the Code for Use or Possession of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.

Rather, such Person would only be subject to discipline 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 responsibilities according to Code Article 21.3.

Also, the obligation to require an employee to be bound by the Code is subje ct to applicable law.

WT 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 with the Delegated Third Parties and their employees – either employment, contract ual or otherwise – have explicit provisions incorporated according to which such Persons are bound by, agree to comply with these Anti -Doping Rules, and agree on the WT’s authority to solve the anti -doping cases.]

WT 2021 Anti-Doping Rules 7 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 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’s B Sample is analyzed and the analysis of the Athlete’s B Sample confirms the presence of the Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found in the Athlete’s A Sample ; or where the Athlete’s A or B Sample is split into two (2) parts and the analysis of the confirmation part of the split Sample confirms the presence of the Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found in the first part of the split Sample or the Athlete waives analysis of the confirmation part of the split Sample .3 2.1.3 Excepting those substances for which a Decision Limit is specifically identified in the Prohibited List or a Technical Document , the presence of any reported quantity of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an Athlete’s Sample shall constitute an anti -doping rule violation.

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 Athlet e 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 , 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 fai lure of the Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is not material.

It is sufficient that the Prohibited Substance 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 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: The 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.]

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 es tablished by any reliable means.

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 profiling, including data collected as part of the Athlete Biological Passport, or other analytical information which does not otherwise satisfy all the requirem ents to establish “Presence” of a Prohibited Substance under Article 2.1.

For example, Use may be established based upon reliable analytical data from the analysis of an A Sample (without confirmatio n 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 Sample.]

WT 2021 Anti-Doping Rules 8 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 without compelling justification after n otification by a duly authorized Person .6 2.4 Whereabouts Failures by an Athlete Any combination of three (3) missed tests and/or filing failures , as defined in the International Standard for Results Management , within a twelve (12) month period by an Athlete in a Registered Testing Pool.

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 , or Possession by an Athlete Out -of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method which is prohibited Out-of-Competition 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 justification.

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 connec tion with an Athlete , Competition or training, unless the Athlete Support Person establishes that the Possession is consistent with a TUE granted to an Athlete in accordance with Article 4.4 or other acceptable justification.

7 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 principle established for violations of Article 2.1 and violations of Article 2.2 in re spect 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-Competit ion.

(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 [Comment to Article 2.3: Error!

Main Document Only.

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 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 by the Athlete.]

7 [Comment to Artic les 2.6.1 and 2.6.2: Acceptable justification would not include, for example, buying or Possessing a Prohibited Substance for purposes of giving it to a friend or relative, except under justifiable medical circumstances where that Person had a physician’s prescription, e.g., buying Insulin for a diabetic child.]

[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 a nd emergency situations (e.g., an epinephrine auto -injector), or (b) an Athlete Possessing a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method for therapeutic reasons shortly prior to applying fo r and receiving a determination on a TUE.]

WT 2021 Anti-Doping Rules 9 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 -Competition of any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method , or Administration or Attempted Administration to any Athlete Out -of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method that is Prohibited Out-of-Competition 2.9 Complicity or Attempted Complicity by an Athle te or Other Person Assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, conspiring, covering up or any other type of intentional complicity or Attempted complicity involving an anti -doping rule violation, Attempted anti-doping rule violation or violation of Article 10.14.1 by another Person .8 2.10 Prohibited Association by an Athlete or Other Person 2.10.1 Association by an Athlete or other Person subject to the authority of an Anti-Doping Organization in a professional or sport -related capacity with any Athlete Support Person who: 2.10.1.1 If subject to the authority of an Anti-Doping Organization , is serving a period of Ineligibility ; or 2.10.1.2 If not subject to the authority of an Anti-Doping Organization and where Ineligibility has not been addressed in a Results Management process pursuant to the Code , has been convicted or found in a criminal, disciplinary or professional proceeding to have engaged in conduct which would have constituted a violation of anti -doping rules if Code -compliant rules had been applicable to such Person.

The disqualifying status of such Person shall be in force for the longer of six (6) years from 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 Organizations 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 8 [Comment to Article 2.9: Complicity or Attempted Complicity may include either physical or psychological assistance.]

9 [Comment to Article 2.10: Athletes and other Persons must not work with coaches, trainers, physicians or other Athlete Suppor t Personnel who are In eligible on account of an anti -doping rule violation or who have been criminally convicted or professionally WT 2021 Anti-Doping Rules 10 2.11 Acts by an Athlete or Other Person to Discourage or Retaliate Against Reporting to Authorities Where such conduct does not otherwise constitute a violation of Article 2.5: 2.11.1 Any act which threatens or seeks to intimidate another Person with the int ent of discouraging the Person from the good -faith reporting of 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 disc iplinary body, hearing body or Person conducting an investigation for WADA or an Anti-Doping Organization .

2.11.2 Retaliation against a Person who, in good faith, has provided evidence 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 conducting an investigation for WADA or an Anti-Doping Organization .

For purposes of Article 2.11, retaliation, threatening and intimidation include an act taken against such Person either because the act lacks a good faith basis or is a disproportionate response.10 ARTICLE 3 PROOF OF DOPING 3.1 Burdens and Standards of Proof WT shall have the burden of establishing that an anti -doping rule violation has occurred.

The standard of proof shall be whether WT has established an anti -doping rule violation to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel beari ng in mind the seriousness 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 probability.11 disciplined in relation to doping.

This also prohibits association with any other Athlete who is acting as a coach or Athlete Support Person while serving a period of Ineligibility.

Some examples of the types of association which are prohibited include: obtaining training, strategy, technique, nutrition or medical advice; obtaining therapy, treatment or prescriptions; providing any bodi ly products fo r 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 notify the Athlete or other Pe rson 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 Support Person.]

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.]

[Comment to Article 2.11.2: Retaliation would include, for example, actions that threaten the physical or mental well -being or economic interests of the reporting Persons, their families or associates.

Retaliation would not include an Anti -Doping Organization asserting in good faith an anti -doping rule violation against the reporting Person.

For pu rposes 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 WT is comparable to the standard which is applied in most countries to cases involving professional misconduct.]

WT 2021 Anti-Doping Rules 11 3.2 Methods of Establishing Facts and Presumptions Facts related to anti -doping rule violations may be established by any reliable means, including admissions.12 The following rules of proof shall be applicable in doping cases: 3.2.1 Analytical methods or Decision Limits approved by WADA after consultation within the relevant scientific community or which have been the subject of peer review are presumed to be scientifically valid.

Any Athlete or other Person seeking to challenge wheth er 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, app ellate 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 amic us curiae or otherwise provide evidence in such proceeding.

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 3.2.2 WADA -accredited 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 presumptio n by establishing that a departure from the International Standard for Laboratories 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 fr om the International Standard for Laboratories occurred which could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding , then WT shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding .14 3.2.3 Departures from any other International Standard 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 12 [Comment to Article 3.2: For example, WT may establish an anti -doping rule violation under Article 2.2 based on the Athlete’s admissions, the credible testimony of third Persons, reliable document ary evidence, reliable analytical data from either an A or B Sample as provided in the Comments to Article 2.2, or conclusions drawn from the profile of a series of the Athlete’s blood or 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 Analytical Finding if the estimated concentration 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 Levels shall not be subject to challenge.