Правила. АНТИДОПИНГОВЫЕ_ПРАВИЛА_МСМФ. Антидопинговые правила мсмф
 Скачать 154.05 Kb.
|
|
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-ofCompetition 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 connection 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 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 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 Athlete 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 association 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. 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 intent 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 disciplinary 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 noncompliance 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 ISMF shall have the burden of establishing that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred. The standard of proof shall be whether ISMF has established an anti-doping rule violation to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel bearing 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 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 whether the conditions for such presumption have been met or to rebut this 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. initial hearing body, appellate 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 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 presumption 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 from the International Standard for Laboratories occurred which could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding, then ISMF 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 constitute a defense to an anti-doping rule violation;15 provided, however, if the Athlete or other Person establishes that a departure from one of the specific International Standard provisions listed below could reasonably have caused an anti-doping rule violation based on an Adverse Analytical Finding or whereabouts failure, then ISMF shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding or the whereabouts failure: (i) a departure from the International Standard for Testing and Investigations related to Sample collection or Sample handling which could reasonably have caused an anti-doping rule violation based on an Adverse Analytical Finding, in which case ISMF shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding; (ii) a departure from the International Standard for Results Management or International Standard for Testing and Investigations related to an Adverse Passport Finding which could reasonably have caused an anti-doping rule violation, in which case ISMF shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the anti-doping rule violation; (iii) a departure from the International Standard for Results Management related to the requirement to provide notice to the Athlete of the B Sample opening which could reasonably have caused an anti-doping rule violation based on an Adverse Analytical Finding, in which case ISMF shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding; 16 (iv) a departure from the International Standard for Results Management related to Athlete notification which could reasonably have caused an anti-doping rule violation based on a whereabouts failure, in which case ISMF shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the whereabouts failure. 3.2.4 The facts established by a decision of a court or professional disciplinary tribunal of competent jurisdiction which is not the subject of a pending appeal shall be irrefutable evidence against the Athlete or other Person to whom the decision pertained of those facts unless the Athlete or other Person establishes that the decision violated principles of natural justice. 3.2.5 The hearing panel in a hearing on an anti-doping rule violation may draw an inference adverse to the Athlete or other Person who is asserted to have committed an anti-doping rule violation based on the Athlete’s or other Person’s refusal, after a request made in a reasonable time in advance of the hearing, to appear at the hearing (either in person or telephonically as directed by the hearing panel) and to answer questions from the hearing panel or ISMF. ARTICLE 4 THE PROHIBITED LIST 4.1 Incorporation of the Prohibited List These Anti-Doping Rules incorporate the Prohibited List, which is published and revised by WADA as described in Article 4.1 of the Code. Unless provided otherwise in the Prohibited List or a revision, the Prohibited List and revisions shall go into effect under these Anti-Doping Rules three (3) months after publication by WADA, without requiring any further action by ISMF or its National Federations. All Athletes and other Persons shall be bound by the Prohibited List, and any revisions thereto, from the date they go into effect, without further formality. It is the responsibility of all Athletes and other Persons to familiarize themselves with the most up-to-date version of the Prohibited List and all revisions thereto. ISMF shall provide its National Federations with the most recent version of the Prohibited List. Each National Federation shall in turn ensure that its members, and the constituents of its members, are also provided with the most recent version of the Prohibited List. 4.2 Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods Identified on the Prohibited List 4.2.1 Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods The Prohibited List shall identify those Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods which are prohibited as doping at all times (both In-Competition and Out-of-Competition) because of their potential to enhance performance in future Competitions or their masking potential, and those substances and methods which are prohibited In-Competition only. The Prohibited List may be expanded by WADA for a particular sport. Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods may be included in the Prohibited List by general category (e.g., anabolic agents) or by specific reference to a particular substance or method.18 4.2.2 Specified Substances or Specified Methods For purposes of the application of Article 10, all Prohibited Substances shall be Specified Substances except as identified on the Prohibited List. No Prohibited Method shall be a Specified Method unless it is specifically identified as a Specified Method on the Prohibited List. 4.2.3 Substances of Abuse For purposes of applying Article 10, Substances of Abuse shall include those Prohibited Substances which are specifically identified as Substances of Abuse on the Prohibited List because they are frequently abused in society outside of the context of sport. 4.3 WADA’s Determination of the Prohibited List WADA’s determination of the Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods that will be included on the Prohibited List, the classification of substances into categories on the Prohibited List, the classification of a substance as prohibited at all times or In-Competition only, the classification of a substance or method as a Specified Substance, Specified Method or Substance of Abuse is final and shall not be subject to any challenge by an Athlete or other Person including, but not limited to, any challenge based on an argument that the substance or method was not a masking agent or did not have the potential to enhance performance, represent a health risk or violate the spirit of sport. 4.4 Therapeutic Use Exemptions (“TUEs”) 4.4.1 The presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers, and/or the Use or Attempted Use, Possession or Administration or Attempted Administration of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method, shall not be considered an antidoping rule violation if it is consistent with the provisions of a TUE granted in accordance with the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions. 4.4.2 TUE Applications 4.4.2.1 Athletes who are not International-Level Athletes shall apply to their National Anti-Doping Organization for a TUE. If the National Anti-Doping Organization denies the application, the Athlete may appeal exclusively to the national-level appeal body described in Article 13.2.2. 4.4.2.2 Athletes who are International-Level Athletes shall apply to ISMF. 4.4.3 TUE Recognition 4.4.3.1 Where the Athlete already has a TUE granted by their National AntiDoping Organization pursuant to Article 4.4 of the Code for the substance or method in question and provided that such TUE has been reported in accordance with Article 5.5 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, ISMF will automatically recognize it for purposes of international-level Competition without the need to review the relevant clinical information. 4.4.3.2 If ISMF chooses to test an Athlete who is not an International-Level Athlete, ISMF must recognize a TUE granted to that Athlete by their National Anti-Doping Organization unless the Athlete is required to apply for recognition of the TUE pursuant to Articles 5.8 and 7.0 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions. 4.4.4 TUE Application Process 4.4.4.1 If the Athlete does not already have a TUE granted by their National Anti-Doping Organization for the substance or method in question, the Athlete must apply directly to ISMF. 4.4.4.2 An application to ISMF for grant or recognition of a TUE must be made as soon as possible, save where Articles 4.1 or 4.3 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions apply. The application shall be made in accordance with Article 6 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions as posted on ISMF’s website. 4.4.4.3 ISMF shall establish a Therapeutic Use Exemption Committee (“TUEC”) to consider applications for the grant or recognition of TUEs in accordance with Article 4.4.4.3(a)-(d) below: (a) The TUEC shall consist of a minimum of three (3) members with experience in the care and treatment of Athletes and sound knowledge of clinical, sports and exercise medicine. Each appointed member should serve a term of four (4) years which is renewable. (b) Before serving as a member of the TUEC, each member must sign a conflict of interest and confidentiality declaration. The appointed members shall not be employees of ISMF. (c) When an application to ISMF for the grant or recognition of a TUE is made, the Chair of the TUEC or the ISMF shall appoint three (3) members (which may include the Chair) to consider the application. (d) Before considering a TUE application, each member shall disclose any circumstances likely to affect their impartiality with respect to the Athlete making the application. If a member is unwilling or unable to assess the Athlete’s TUE application, for any reason, the Chair or the ISMF may appoint a replacement from the pool of members appointed under point (a) above. The Chair cannot serve as a member of the TUEC if there are any circumstances which are likely to affect the impartiality of the TUE decision. 4.4.4.4 The TUEC shall promptly evaluate and decide upon the application in accordance with the relevant provisions of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions and usually (i.e., unless exceptional circumstances apply) within no more than twenty-one (21) days of receipt of a complete application. Where the application is made in a reasonable time prior to an Event, the TUEC must use its best endeavors to issue its decision before the start of the Event. 4.4.4.5 The TUEC decision shall be the final decision of ISMF and may be appealed in accordance with Article 4.4.7. ISMF TUEC decision shall be notified in writing to the Athlete, and to WADA and other Anti-Doping Organizations in accordance with the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions. It shall also promptly be reported into ADAMS. |