III. Sanctions on individuals

More documents

Recommendations

Info

<strong>III</strong>. <strong>Sanctions</strong> on individuals • The period of ineligibility imposed for a first violation of Articles 2.1, 2.2 or 2.6 shall be 2 years, unless the conditions for eliminating or reducing the period of ineligibility or the ones for increasing it, are met (Article 10.2) • For violations of Articles 2.3 or 2.5, the period of ineligibility imposed shall be 2 years unless the conditions for eliminating the period of ineligibility or the ones for increasing it, are met (Article 10.3.1) • For violations of Articles 2.7 or 2.8, the period of ineligibility imposed shall be a minimum of 4 years up to lifetime unless the conditions for eliminating the period of ineligibility are met (Article 10.3.2) • For violations of Article 2.4, the period of ineligibility imposed shall be at a minimum 1 year and at a maximum 2 years based on the athlete’s degree of fault (Article 10.3.3)
<strong>III</strong>. <strong>Sanctions</strong> on individuals • Article 10.4 – Elimination or reduction of the period of ineligibility for specified substances under specific circumstances Where an athlete can establish how a specified substance entered her/his body or came into her/his possession and that such specified substance was not intended to enhance the athlete’s sport performance, the period of ineligibility of Article 10.2 shall be replaced by, at a minimum, a reprimand and, at a maximum, 2 years of ineligibility To justify any elimination or reduction, the athlete must produce corroborating evidence which establishes to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel the absence of an intent to enhance sport performance or mask the use of a performance-enhancing substance. The athlete’s degree of fault shall be the criterion considered in assessing any reduction of the period of ineligibility • Examples of cases where Article 10.4 has been applied and where the intent to enhance sport performance was not an issue (the sports-body agreed to the absence of intent to enhance performance): CAS 2011/A/2495 FINA v. Cielo & CBDA, CAS 2011/A/2518 Robert Kendrick v. ITF
Page 1 and 2: Issues relating to doping matters W
Page 3 and 4: I. Introduction • In 2003, the Wo
Page 5 and 6: I. Introduction ‣ Article 2.5 - t
Page 7: II. Proof of doping • WADA-accred
Page 11 and 12: III. Sanct
Page 13 and 14: III. Sanct
Page 15 and 16: IV. Consequences to teams • If mo
Page 17: Tribunal Arbitral du Sport Court of

III. Sanctions on individuals

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?