P a g e | 1

“ There may be people that have more talent than you, but there's no excuse for anyone to work harder than you do.”

-Derek Jeter

P a g e | 2

TEAM PLAWYERED

Editorial Board

Gaurav Misra , Publishing Editor , Plawyered

He is currently pursuing B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) from Chanakya National Law University, Patna. A voracious reader and an ardent Arsenal supporter, Plawyered is his way of bringing his love for law and sports on one single platform. .

Tejaswini Ranjan, Managing Editor, Plawyered

She is currently pursuing B.A. LL.B.(Hons.) from Chanakya National Law University, Patna. She is a sports enthusiast and a big fan of . It is her love for sports that made her come up with this portal. Apart from this, she also holds the

experience of working with several legal portals and research journals. Authors

Somit Kumar Singh is currently pursuing law at Chanakya National Law University. He has an interest in debating and mooting and has represented his University in various Debating and Mooting tournaments. His interests include Constitutional Law and Criminal Law.

P a g e | 3

Aparna Arya is currently pursuing law at Chanakya National Law University. She has an interest in mooting and research and has represented her institution in moot court competitions. Her interests include International Law and Criminal Law.

Content Editors

Vishakha Srivastava is currently pursuing B.A. L.L.B. (Hons.) from Chanakya National Law University, Patna. She is an avid reader and has a special corner for fiction. She is also a Student Editor at CNLU Law Journal.

Ashutosh Kashyap is currently pursuing B.A. LL.B.(Hons.) from Chanakya National Law University, Patna. He is a keen reader and an enthusiast orator. His love for poems can be reflected through his blog.

*The views expressed in the articles are solely the views of the respective authors.

**The copyright of the magazine vests with www.plawyered.com . All communications are to be made at [email protected]

P a g e | 4

#1 RIO OLYMPICS: THE DARKER SIDE

GAURAV MISRA

Image Courtesy:notey.com

The Rio Olympics started off with Brazilian Economy and an attempt to much pomp and show, not in any way integrate the population. It could have lesser than any of the editions of the helped in directing a sense of unity and Modern , setting aside hope to reach certain national goals all the apprehensions and the with regard to infrastructure, environment of fear created by forced education and healthcare. It could evictions from the favelas, police have also been a chance for Brazil to violence and wasteful spending of the change the perception of Rio being one Government. But all is not as normal of the most violent cities of world and as it appears to be. Hosting the reduce the crime rate and take strict Olympic Games could have been a measures for its reduction. The great chance to reduce the woes of Olympic Games are more of a

P a g e | 5 nightmare for Rio as a city and the appear slowly and gradually, citizens of Rio, as Rio de Janeiro is still indicating that Rio is unable to handle the city lacking basic infrastructure, the pressure. Back then, in 2009, when Educational institutions and more Rio was named the host of 2016 particularly the healthcare system. It is Olympics, the situation was altogether the city where people still die for lack different. Brazil had just become the of medical staff and wrong transfusion fifth-largest economy in the world, the methods. More than that the history of “ effect” was driving massive Rio being one of the most violent cities demand for commodities and the large in the world where gang wars take mining revenues were allowing Brazil place on a regular basis and drug to put funds into human capital. cartels thrive in the unorganized Today, Brazil faces recession which is favelas certainly speaks out that the deepest one in more than a everything is not right. Add to it the , caused by the fall in world brutal gang rape of a teenager by 30 commodity prices and corruption men in the month of May, the picture scandals under President Dilma appears to be horrifying. Getting a Rousseff. Rio de Janeiro, is almost chance to host the Olympics is the bankrupt and it declared a “state of most coveted honour for a modern public calamity in financial metropolitan city. It is altogether administration” in June. The state different from hosting a Football world government said the crisis could cause cup which Brazil successfully did in a “total collapse in public security, 2014. We need to understand that a health, education, transport and Football world cup is spread across the environmental management.” whole Nation whereas the Olympics Olympics is much more than just a are hosted in one particular city. In the sporting event. It has a strong case of Football World Cup, the investment appeal as well. Data shows pressure and crowd is distributed that stock markets of host countries equally throughout the Nation whereas have historically generated positive in the case of the Olympics, the returns during the Olympics as well as pressure is centralized on a city, in this in the year following the event. But for Case Rio de Janeiro and the cracks

P a g e | 6 a country like Brazil which is facing the Authorities tried to hide these favelas worst financial crisis, investment as they were termed ugly. This did not scenario looks grim. Six out of the go down well with the sentiments of eight countries which have hosted the people. Many favelas were Olympics since 1984 have shown controversially demolished. Favelas positive investment returns. This time are said to be the slums in Brazil and the Olympics take place in a country are generally considered squatter which is struggling with a political settlements. It is often said that the crisis so deep that most of the people real Rio resides in these settlements. are uninterested in the games, a Massive projects were initiated to scandalous corruption investigation is revitalize the South Zone, Central Rio going on and an outbreak of Zika virus and Barra da Tijuca to create an image because of which many athletes have of a city which could have been shown refused to attend the Olympics. But all to the international media and this was very uncertain and difficult to tourists. Meanwhile the people died in predict back then in 2009. But more the favelas from epidemics, drug wars than anything else, the people of Brazil and police confrontations for protests. are not at all happy, the manner in They became just the statistics. Public which the land was taken away from support for the Olympics fell the favelas for the development of drastically. A Datafolha poll showed Olympic village, and the violent that 50 percent of Brazilians opposed clashes which took place for land staging the games, double the number eviction and lack of apathy from the recorded since a similar survey was Government towards the new conducted three years ago. Brazil has “homeless” makes the people of Rio observed its per capita income fall by unhappy and discontent. One fifth of 35 % in the last five years. Although the tickets went unsold. This comes as the stadiums have been built in time , a big message. Before the city secured but the state Government has the bid for the 2016 Olympics, the completely failed in the construction of state’s response focused on upgrading metros and subways. The best of Rio is and improving the favelas. Afterwards, very different from the best of London, the situation changed drastically. as it faces comparison with a first

P a g e | 7 world country. Many of the things are not siding with Rio as compared to the developed nations. In case of London Olympics, much of the infrastructure necessity was already present before handedly whereas it was altogether different in the case of Brazil. Generally before the start of a grand event like Olympics, the predictions are usually pessimistic and calamitous but in reality they are overhyped. But in the case of Rio Olympics, the situation, statistics and reality is far too scary than being just pessimistic. Olympics, as a sporting event will be a success as they have always been, but what happens afterwards is a question which has no answers for now.

P a g e | 8

#2 OSCAR PISTORIOUS: THE BLADE RUNNER AND THE MURDER OF REEVA STEENKAMP

APARNA ARYA & SOMIT KUMAR SINGH

Image Courtesy:nbcnews.com

Oscar Pistorious famously known as the Paralympic games and the Olympic the “Blade Runner” is a South African Games. After his amazing athlete. Both his legs were amputated performances in the Paralympics that at the age of 11 months due to some is winning a gold medal in 100meters medical complications. His claim to and 200meters he attempted the non- fame was that he was the first person disabled International Competition to participate and compete in the both and thus in the year 2011 he became

P a g e | 9 the very first athlete who being a of the Olympics. Recently on 6th July double leg amputee had won a non- 2016 Oscar Pistorious was re- disabled track medal and to his sentenced for the death of his continuing dream at the 2012 girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp and was London Olympics, Pistorious became sentenced to 6 years of prison time for the first double-leg amputee to be part the murder of his girlfriend.

THE DEATH

After few months of becoming the first but she could never be sure if she amputee competing at the Olympics, wanted to end her relationship with on Valentine’s Day of 2013 Oscar was him. During the night of 14th February arrested and charged for the alleged 2013 both Oscar and Reeva were murder of his girlfriend who was a sleeping in the bedroom and while famous South African supermodel, Oscar was in the bedroom he heard Reeva Steenkamp. Oscar and Reeva some noise coming from the started dating late in the year of 2012 bathroom. When he approached that and just after three months of their place he shouted and asked the relationship Reeva was murdered. intruder to come out but fearing threat Oscar Pistorious was alleged to have a from the intruder he filed bullets history of domestic violence not only aiming at the bathroom which resulted with Reeva Steenkamp but with other in the death of Reeva Steenkamp. partners as well. Reeva communicated Oscar had fired four gunshots. this a lot f times to her family members

THE TRIAL

At the start of the trial Oscar pleaded wasn’t wearing his prosthetics which not guilty to the pre-meditated murder rules out a possibility of pre-meditated of his girlfriend and this was supported murder. A witness from prosecution by the report from the ballistics which told the court that she heard proved that while firing the arms Oscar “Bloodcurdling Screams” on the

P a g e | 10 night of the alleged murder and that that a WhatsApp text was sent to Oscar she could relate the scream to the ones by Reeva few weeks before the murder we feel when our lives are at a threat. when she is telling the Olympian that, To this the Pistorius responded that “I am scared of you sometimes and the prosecution is using inadmissible how you snap at me and how you will evidence and that he approached the react to me.” This was all because of a bathroom only to protect his girlfriend misunderstanding in between the because he thought that she was in couple due to some other male person danger from the intruder. When who Reeva was flirting with. But ten during the trial a graphic photograph days prior to the murder by CCTV from the forensics of the head would of video footage both Oscar and Reeva Reeva Steenkamp was shown in the were seen flirting and kissing each court openly on screens Oscar vomited other at a public place and there was number of times in the courtroom no sign of any fight. The trial became itself because he could not emotionally much controversial when the request bear with the photographs. When was made for a Psychiatric test. The again in the trial Oscar was asked to forensic expert told and presented a look at the pictures of the head wound report to the court that Oscar had and admit that he has killed Reeva, he suffered time and gain in his life from refused to look at the pictures saying, “generalized anxiety,” right from “I won’t look at the picture and be the childhood when he was amputated tormented. As I picked up Reeva, My when he was not even an year old, to hand touched her head. I remember. I the divorce of his parents at the age of was there. I don’t have to look at a Six years and finally the death of his picture. I was there.” During the trail it mother when he was just 15 years old. was also revealed by the police officer

RE-SENTENCING AND THE DECISION

In the month of December, 2015 overturned the verdict that Oscar was coming on to the decision of the court, liable for culpable Homicide but rather the Supreme Court of Appeals the court found out and came to a

P a g e | 11 conclusion that Pistorious was guilty of Steenkamp on the night of 14th murder placing reliance on a very basic February 2013. A controversy spurred premise that before firing his gun, he out that the judge has given a biased should have known that such a bullet sentence because the minimum could kill somebody and even though if punishment for a death in it was for defense at was not is 15 years but Oscar was awarded only proportional to the threat that he was 6 years. Responding to this the Judge suffering. Hence firing three bullets argued that Oscar had already from such a distance would have killed completed 12 months in prison anybody. On 6th July 2016 Thokozile resulting from the decision of culpable Masipa sentenced Oscar Pistorious to homicide and it was evident from that serve six years of imprisonment for the he has very much remorseful for his murder of his girlfriend Reeva deeds.

P a g e | 12

#3 WORLD'S SPORTS CAPITAL WELCOMES INTERACTIVE FANTASY SPORTS

TEJASWINI RANJAN

Image Courtesy: dotcomplicated.co

Interactive fantasy sports are games of win prizes. In addition to establishing skill in which contestants assemble a the means for regulating interactive roster of athletes in a given sport and fantasy sports in New York State, this use the actual performance statistics of legislation also takes steps to institute those athletes to determine the important consumer protections for contest’s winner. Contestants pay fees players for the first time, some of to enter the contest and, if successful which include offering introductory in performing against their opponent, procedures to new players, identifying

P a g e | 13 highly experienced players, prohibiting with oversight from state regulators, the participation of minors and new consumer protections, and more protecting players' funds upon deposit. funding for education. This allows thousands of New Yorkers The legislation clarifies New York state the opportunity to continue playing laws to affirm the legality of fantasy these games that they have been sports and installs important playing for over a decade. With strong consumer protections by creating a consumer protections and economic clear set of regulations fantasy sports benefits to the state, these sports are companies must follow. The bill’s more than online games they have the passage in New York capped an potential to generate millions of extraordinary run of national state dollars in revenue for New York State. legislative progress in the last six This will allow these companies to months, with seven legislative bodies – continue operating while ensuring fans Colorado, Indiana, Mississippi, have a safe environment to play in. Missouri, New York, Tennessee, and Governor Andrew M. Cuomo signed Virginia now passing a fantasy sports legislation to legalize interactive bill this year. fantasy sports in New York State. The bill (S.8153/A.10736) requires that The legislation represents a thoughtful fantasy sports companies must register legislative process, where bi- with, and operate under regulations partisanship and willingness for the issued by, the New York State Gaming sports capital of the world and a Commission. It is expected that once thriving home for tech startups – a fully implemented, the legislation will natural fit for fantasy sports. New York generate approximately $4 million in is the seventh state to pass a fantasy revenue to fund state education aid. sports bill just this year; a remarkable Daily fantasy sports have proven to be amount of progress in a short period of popular in New York, but until now time. It speaks to the popularity of our have operated with no supervision and game, the passion and advocacy efforts no protections for players. The of our fans and the immense potential legislation strikes the right balance states are seeing in the fantasy sports that allows this activity to continue industry.

P a g e | 14

The legislation seeks to accomplish the total entries allowed for each following: contest;  Taking measures to protect the – Protect games more than three privacy and online security of million New Yorkers play and many players and their accounts; companies will be able to offer fantasy  Keeping player funds separate contests in time for the upcoming NFL from operating funds, ensuring season. player money is accessible at all – Install consumer protections all times; and more; fantasy sports operator must adhere to  Ensures fantasy sports including: operators offering contests to New York state residents prior  Ensuring players are 18 and to November 10, 2015, are able above; to continue operating until their  Requiring all fantasy game application for registration has operators to be registered and been approved or denied, vetted by the State; provided they file an application  Enabling players to exclude for registration with the State of themselves from contests and New York. permanently close their accounts at any time;  Offering introductory on- boarding for new players;  Prohibiting any contest based on a collegiate or high school sport or athletic event;  Requiring “high experienced players” to be clearly identified for all users to see;  Disclosing the number of entries a player may submit to each contest, and the number of

P a g e | 15

#4 ICC HALL OF FAME : LOHMANN, MORRIS, MURALIDARAN AND ROLTON TO BE INDUCTED INTO THE ICC CRICKET HALL OF FAME

Image Courtesy:Wikimedia.org

The ICC Cricket Hall of Fame was of Fame recognises the achievements launched on 2 January 2009 in of the legends of the game from association with the Federation of cricket's long and illustrious history. International Cricketers Associations The initial intake of inductees are the (FICA), as part of the ICC's centenary 55 players named in the FICA Hall of year celebrations. The ICC Cricket Hall

P a g e | 16

Fame, which ran between 1999 and with twice ICC Women’s World Cup 2003. This was supplemented by a winner and former Australia women’s select group of inductions each year, Karen Rolton, her compatriot which started in 2009 when five new , a member of Don inductees; , Clarrie Bradman’s ‘invincibles’ and England’s Grimmett, , Victor , the 19th century fast Trumper and , were bowler who took 100 in just 16 announced as new members of the ICC Tests. Cricket Hall of Fame at the LG ICC The four iconic cricketers were voted Awards. by the ICC Cricket Hall of Famers as Induction ceremonies take place well as members of the media. They throughout the cricket calendar where will be presented with commemorative the inductees (or, in the case of those caps honouring their contribution to who have passed away, their relatives) the game to mark their induction. are presented with a commemorative Family members will represent ICC Cricket Hall of Fame cap. The Lohmann and Morris at the living members of the ICC Cricket Hall presentations. of Fame are also involved in the selection process to the new intake of Muralidaran, whose last legends into the Hall of Fame each international fixture was the final of year. the ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 in The International Cricket Council Mumbai finished his career with 800 announced that Muttiah Muralidaran, wickets in Tests, 534 in One- Karen Rolton, Arthur Morris and Day Internationals and 13 wickets in 12 George Lohmann will be inducted into T20Is. He grabbed 10 wickets in a the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame later this match 22 times and five wickets in an year. innings 67 times to make Sri Lanka a force to reckon with in . Record-breaking off- spinner Muralidaran becomes the first Known to spin the ball prodigiously, Sri Lankan player to be inductedalong Muralidaran also played a big part in

P a g e | 17

Sri Lanka’s ODI successes from 1993 to cricketer in the ICC Cricket Hall of 2011 and was a member of the squads Fame. that won the ICC Cricket World Cup Morris was the man at the other end 1996 and shared the ICC Champions when was out for a duck Trophy 2002 with . in his final Test innings at The Oval in

1948 and went on to score 196 in that Lohmann, an exponent of swing match. He was named in Australia’s bowling in the late 19th century and Test team of the 20th century and rated by his contemporaries as the captained his country twice, in 1951 most difficult opponent, will be the and 1954. 27th Englishman in the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame list. He raced to 100 Test Morris scored a total of 12,614 runs in wickets in 16 matches but tuberculosis 162 first-class matches, including shortened his career and he died at the 3,533 runs in Tests. age of 36 in 1901.

Rolton, a dynamic all-rounder in both In an 18-Test career from 1886 to Tests and ODIs who is best 1896, Lohmann took 112 wickets, remembered for her match-winning including nine for 28 against South century in the ICC Women’s World Africa at the Old Wanderers, and also Cup 2005 final, will be only the sixth scored 213 runs. He was 21 when he woman and the third Australian to get first played and took one wicket in his onto the coveted list. first two Tests in 1886, but at The Oval he took seven for 36 and five for 68 as In a 14-year international career from England won by an innings against 1997 to 2009, Rolton played 14 Tests Australia. and 141 One-Day Internationals,

scoring 1,002 and 4,814 runs Morris, a stylish left-hander of the respectively. She also hit two Test and 1940s and 50s who scored 12 centuries eight ODI centuries. Rolton also and 12 fifties in 46 Tests between 1946 featured in 15 T20Is, scoring 405 runs and 1955, will be the 22nd Australia at an average of just under 51.

P a g e | 18

She was a member of the Australia Women’s World Cups in 1997 and women’s sides which won the ICC 2005.

VOTING PROCESS

To start the process towards the first . A representative of FICA (nominated induction ceremony for the ICC Cricket by FICA) Hall of Fame, in association with FICA,

a Nominations Committee was formed. This committee would be presented This committee continues to this day with a long list of nominations collated but changes every two years, as per by the ICC Chief Executive and ICC guidelines. provided by:

This committee is made up of the . ICC Management following individuals: . Current living members of the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame . The ICC President . One former player (already in the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame) Any nominee that is a former player . One current player (nominated by must not have played an official ICC Management) international match (Test, ODI or T20) in the five years preceding the closing . One member of the media date for nominations. (nominated by ICC Management)

. One representative of the Such a player would normally have to Association of Cricket Statisticians and meet at least one of the following Historians (nominated by the criteria in order to be eligible for Association of Cricket Statisticians and nomination and therefore induction Historians) into the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame: . One women's cricket representative . (nominated by the ICC women's He must have a Test and/or ODI committee) average of 50 or above

P a g e | 19

. He must have scored 8000 Test also a sweep-up criterion if someone and/or ODI runs and 20 hundreds in regarded as a great of the game does either or both those forms of the game not fit into any of the above criteria) . He must have taken 200 Test wickets in either or both forms of the Some players will be eligible in more game and have a strike-rate of a wicket than one criterion. For example, Viv every 50 balls in Tests and/or 30 balls Richards' record as captain would in ODIs entitle him to be nominated and . A captain must have led his side in at inducted as either an ODI or a Test least 25 Tests and/or 100 ODIs with a leader. win percentage of 50 per cent or more Likewise, once he has retired for five in either or both years, the same would be true of . A wicketkeeper must have secured in both Test and 200 dismissals in either or both Tests ODI batting figures. Additionally, it and ODIs was agreed by the ICC and FICA that the following paragraphs be inserted . A woman, in Tests, must have scored ahead of the criteria distributed to 1000 runs at an average of 50 or more each member of the Nominations and/or taken 50 wickets Committee and the Voting Academy: . In ODIs a women must have scored

2000 runs at an average of 35 or better "The Nominations committee will and/or taken 100 wickets put forward nominations split . If a person, team or institution does into two eras, pre- and post-1960, not fall within any of the above criteria, to ensure due recognition to he, she or it can still be put forward by those from the earlier period the Nominations Committee if, in the which pre-dated mass media and opinion of its members, he, she or it the chance for many of those has had a fundamental effect on the selecting the inductees to have history of the game (this criterion first-hand knowledge of the would also allow an eminent nominees. As a result, the Voting journalist, umpire, match referee or Academy will choose at least one administrator to be nominated. It is

P a g e | 20

candidate from each of the eras . A maximum of 10 male selections and for induction into the ICC Cricket three female selections can be put Hall of Fame. forward to be voted upon by the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame Voting Academy. "The following criteria for

eligibility to enter the Hall of The ICC Cricket Hall of Fame Voting Fame should be viewed as a Academy is made up of the following guideline for assessing players individuals: and are especially relevant when applied to recent or . The ICC President contemporary players. However, . All living ICC Cricket Hall of Fame when assessing the merits of members - total of 43 (as of 2013) players from past eras they need . One representative from each ICC not be strictly enforced given the Full Member (to be nominated by each lesser volume of cricket played in Member) - total of 10 those eras." . One member of the media from each

of the ICC Full Members - total of 10 It is not a requirement for someone to . An Associate and Affiliate be nominated from each of the representative (nominated by the eligibility criteria every year. The Associate and Affiliate representatives categories are designed to: on the ICC Board and/or ICC . Be strict enough to ensure that only a Management) finite number of individuals qualify; . A representative of the Association . Be wide-ranging enough to include all of Cricket Statisticians and Historians possible areas of excellence; and (nominated by the Association of . Allow for editorial judgment by the Cricket Statisticians and Historians) voting academy; in other words, just . One women's cricket representative because a player is nominated by the (nominated by the ICC women's public, for example, it does not mean committee) that that the player is then voted in . A representative of FICA (as by the voting academy. nominated by FICA)

P a g e | 21

the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame (2010). A member of the ICC Cricket Hall of Thereafter, the top three in the poll Fame Voting Academy can vote for up continue to be inducted for the male to three nominees on the ballot with nominees, while the top female is three votes allocated to his/her first inducted from the three nominees in pick, two to his/her0second, one to that category. his/her third choice and the same for If a nominee fails to gain the requisite the female nominees on their ballot. support in any given year then he, she In the first year of operation, the top or it can still be nominated for the five male nominees were inducted into following year or any time thereafter.

P a g e | 22

#5 CHANKAYA SOCCER LEAGUE 2016

The Chankya Soccer league (CSL) was organized by the students of Chankya National Law University at the CNLU grounds in Patna from the 4th to the 11th of August 2016. Six teams took part in the competition , who were allotted 3000 points each for buying players at an auction organized before the tournament started. The Round Robin format was followed, with the two teams with the highest points advancing to the finals. Nawab -e- Awadh emerged as winners of the tournament , while Band of Brothers finished as Runners-up. Nishant from the 1st year was the Best emerging player of the tournament , while Alok Pal was the best player with four goals to his name. Below are a few scenes from the tournament finals captured by Rajat Kashyap of 2nd Year.

P a g e | 23

P a g e | 24

P a g e | 25

P a g e | 26

P a g e | 27

P a g e | 28

P a g e | 29

Image Courtesy : Rajat Kahyap

P a g e | 30

#6 RIO OLYMPICS MEDAL TALLY ( AS ON 14TH AUGUST 2016)

Image Courtesy : qzprod.files

COUNTRY GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL

24 18 18 60

USA

13 11 17 41

P a g e | 31

COUNTRY GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL

CHN

10 13 7 30

GBR

8 5 3 16

GER

7 3 14 24

JPN

6 9 8 23

RUS

6 7 9 22

AUS

P a g e | 32

COUNTRY GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL

6 7 5 18

ITA

6 3 4 13

KOR

5 8 5 18

FRA

5 3 3 11

HUN

3 2 3 8

NED

P a g e | 33

COUNTRY GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL

3 0 2 5

ESP

2 6 0 8

NZL

2 2 8 12

CAN

2 2 3 7

KAZ

2 1 1 4

THA

P a g e | 34

COUNTRY GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL

2 1 1 4

BEL

2 1 0 3

CRO

2 0 1 3

SUI

2 0 0 2

IRI

1 3 1 5

SWE

P a g e | 35

COUNTRY GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL

1 2 3 6

DEN

1 2 2 5

PRK

1 2 1 4

BLR

1 1 2 4

POL

1 1 2 4

BRA

P a g e | 36

COUNTRY GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL

1 1 2 4

ROU

1 1 1 3

SLO

1 1 0 2

COL

1 1 0 2

SVK

1 1 0 2

VIE

P a g e | 37

COUNTRY GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL

1 0 4 5

CZE

1 0 2 3

ETH

1 0 2 3

TPE

1 0 1 2

IOA

1 0 1 2

GRE

P a g e | 38

COUNTRY GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL

1 0 1 2

JAM

1 0 0 1

FIJ

1 0 0 1

KOS

1 0 0 1

PUR

1 0 0 1

ARG

P a g e | 39

COUNTRY GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL

1 0 0 1

SIN

0 5 1 6

RSA

0 3 1 4

UKR

0 2 0 2

AZE

0 2 0 2

INA

P a g e | 40

COUNTRY GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL

0 2 0 2

KEN

0 1 2 3

CUB

0 1 2 3

LTU

0 1 1 2

GEO

0 1 0 1

MAS

P a g e | 41

COUNTRY GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL

0 1 0 1

MGL

0 1 0 1

PHI

0 1 0 1

TUR

0 1 0 1

IRL

0 0 3 3

UZB

P a g e | 42

COUNTRY GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL

0 0 2 2

EGY

0 0 2 2

ISR

0 0 2 2

NOR

0 0 1 1

EST

0 0 1 1

KGZ

P a g e | 43

COUNTRY GOLD SILVER BRONZE TOTAL

0 0 1 1

POR

0 0 1 1

TUN

0 0 1 1

UAE

P a g e | 44

#7 MONTHLY SPORTS CALENDER

Image Courtesy :mirror.co.uk

August

5-21: Olympic Games, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

(Key dates: 6-13 swimming and rowing, 6-16 track and road cycling, 11-20 golf, 12-21 athletics)

11-15: Cricket - England Pakistan, fourth Test, The Oval

13: Football - Premier League season starts

20: Cricket - T20 Blast Finals Day, Edgbaston

20-11 Sept: Cycling - Vuelta a Espana

P a g e | 45

21-28: Rowing - World Rowing Championships (non-Olympic events), Rotterdam

24, 27, 30 and 1 & 4 Sept: Cricket - England v Pakistan ODIs

26-28: Formula 1 - Belgian Grand Prix, Spa-Francorchamps

27: Rugby League - Challenge Cup final, Wembley

29-11 Sep: Tennis - US Open, New York

September

2: Rugby Union - Premiership and Pro12 seasons start

2-4: Formula 1 - Italian Grand Prix, Monza

4-5: Football - World Cup Qualifying begins

4-11: Cycling - Tour of Britain

4: MotoGP - British Grand Prix, Silverstone

7-18: Paralympic Games - Rio de Janeiro

7: Cricket - England v Pakistan Twenty20, Old Trafford

9: Athletics - Final Diamond League meeting of the season, Brussels

11: Athletics - Great North Run, Gateshead

13-14: Football - Champions League group stage starts

P a g e | 46

#8 BCCI: DECISIONS BY OMBUDSMAN

Image Courtesy: sportstarlive.com

APPLICANT: RM BHASKAR, HYDERABAD ORDER

The application contained in the Cricket Association (HCA). The applicant’s letter dated 4 February applicant mentioned nine 2016, seeks a clarification as to individuals, their posts and the whether the provisions in the BCCI respective situations that appeared rules pertaining to conflict of to suggest the existence of a conflict interest applies to certain elected of interest. The Ombudsman members of the Executive communicated the applicant’s Committee of the Hyderabad allegations to all the individuals

P a g e | 47 and sought clarifications. appear to find places in the teams. Responses were received by email While this is not to say that such as well as by post. A further reply selections are without merit, the was received from the applicant. large number of such selections This order takes into account all of raises some concerns. Further, the this communication, and makes Ombudsman has observed that observations regarding each of the many relatives of the HCA individuals so mentioned. Before administrators appear to have been venturing into the individual appointed at posts with the HCA, allegations, the Ombudsman is seemingly without following any troubled to note that it appears that procedure or due process. several members of the HCA are Explanations that such running cricket academies in appointments are temporary are parallel with their administrative not satisfactory. The goings-on at appointments, which is a clear the HCA are extremely disturbing, conflict of interest. These and immediate attempts should be administrators usually select the made to curb the high prevalence of selectors, and occasionally, even act favouritism being practised by the as convenors of the selection association in all aspects of the committee for the various teams of game. With these preliminary the association, and therefore, are observations, the Ombudsman will in a position to influence decisions. now address the allegations against When key office bearers are the individuals mentioned by the running their own cricket applicant. academies, it is natural that i) Mr Arshad Ayub (President, selectors will be influenced, and it HCA): It is alleged that Mr Ayub definitely leads of a situation of runs a cricket academy in his own conflict of interest. name; his son has represented The Ombudsman also noted that Hyderabad in an u-19 BCCI several children and near relatives tournament; and players attending of administrators of the HCA the academy appear to be given

P a g e | 48 preference in selection to various academy being run by close Hyderabad teams. As per Mr associates of Mr Manoj (as Ayub’s own admission, he does not admitted), his roles are in conflict. dispute the running of the Arshad Mr Manoj also admits to sitting as Ayub Cricket Academy. Further, as convenor of the selection President of the HCA, he is likely to committee, and it appears that have a key role in the selecting the certain coaches at the academy selectors, which by corollary, is were attached to the HCA during likely to affect the manner in which the 2015-16 cricket season, which, the selections take place, and would if true, is clearly an act of lead to preferences given to certain favouritism and is an unhealthy students over others. There are, practice. The BCCI is requested to therefore, evident concerns in Mr take appropriate action in this Ayub’s role as President of the regard, and examine as to the basis HCA, and in running the academy, on which the staff were so and he is advised to forego one role appointed. for the other with immediate effect iii) Mr Narender Goud (Vice- in order to not violate principles of President, HCA): It is alleged that conflict of interest. his son and many close relatives are ii) Mr K John Manoj (Secretary, employed with the HCA, and he HCA): It is alleged that Mr Manoj also holds multiple positions in runs the St John Cricket Academy; various sub-committees. The that coac Ombudsman notes that Mr Goud’s son’s (permanent) appointment is hes at the academy are employed as highly questionable, and requests coaches, selectors, etc at HCA; and the BCCI to examine this that players at the academy are appointment further, such as was given preference in selections for there any advertisement for the various teams. Mr Manoj states appointment; was an interview that his close associates run the conducted, etc. Regarding the academy, whereas the applicant appointment of relatives, Mr Goud alleges that by virtue of the

P a g e | 49 claims that these were only on a raise serious concerns. However, temporary basis. However, this per se, such selections do not lead prompts the question as to who to the conclusion of a conflict of gave Mr Goud powers to make such interest. temporary appointments, and what v) Mr Syed Moizuddin (President, is the process followed for such HCA): It is alleged that he is a appointments. The BCCI may look government employee. Mr into this matter appropriately. If it Moizuddin clarifies that he has is found that these appointments in sought and obtained permission question were improperly carried from the government for his out, then HCA may be directed to appointment at the HCA, and the recover the money paid as Ombudsman finds no conflict of remuneration to these appointees interest here. vi) Mr Vijayanand from Mr Goud. Additionally, if it (Joint Secretary, HCA): It is alleged appears that Mr Goud’s son’s that he is running an academy in appointment was not in accordance his father’s name. The Ombudsman with due process, and not made by notes that this is a usual practice, to the entire committee responsible run academies in the name of close for such hires, the son’s relatives. It is advised that Mr appointment is liable to be revoked. Vijayanand should be completely Further, the Ombudsman notes disassociated from the running of that while there appears to be no the Dayanand Cricket Academy clarity on the one-person-one-post while he is a member of the HCA. rule regarding sub-committees, such appointments should ideally vii) Mr Purushottam Agarwal be avoided. (Joint Secretary, HCA): It is alleged that his son represented Hyderabad iv) Mr Surender Aggarwal in a u-23 BCCI tournament, and his (President, HCA): It is alleged that nephew represented Hyderabad in his son represented Hyderabad in a other matches. As mentioned u-16 BCCI tournament. As earlier, per se, such selections do expressed earlier, such selections not lead to the conclusion of a

P a g e | 50 conflict of interest. However, it is HCA running cricket academies is 4 common to find that sons/nephews extremely disturbing and get routinely placed in various unhealthy. The Ombudsman is of teams; the large number of such the view that if a person runs a selections becomes a serious issue, cricket academy, that person and should be examined more should not aspire to become a carefully by the BCCI. member of the cricket association or be a part of the management. At viii) Mr Adnan Mahmood the very least, office bearers of (Executive Committee Member, cricket associations should not be HCA): It is alleged that he is a running cricket academies, panel advocate for the HCA, while particularly as they are likely to simultaneously being a member. wield a great deal of influence in Mr Mahmood has clarified that he the manner in which the sport is has not appeared for the HCA nor run in the state, the selection of taken any fees, and the players, the selection of staff, and Ombudsman finds no conflict of so on. A clear trend that has interest here. emerged in this matter is that when ix) Mr Srinivas Reddy (Executive office bearers run academies, they Committee Member, HCA): It is have a tendency to bring their own alleged that he is a government staff from the academies into the employee. Mr Reddy clarifies that association, without following due he has sought and obtained process, or considering aspects permission from the government such as merit. It is advisable that for his appointment at the HCA, individuals interested in running and the Ombudsman finds no cricket academies should forego conflict of interest here. roles in management/associations, and vice versa. Cricket, like any

other sport, should operate in an In conclusion, certain general unbiased environment, where merit observations are relevant here. The and competence are the key trend of executive members of the determinants of participation, and

P a g e | 51 every effort should be made to the process of selection. Further, if ensure that this is maintained. 9. A it is the case that selections are separate common feature in several being made in a biased manner, of the allegations contained in this without due credence being given complaint is that of the children to merit, it will gravely affect the and relatives of office bearers being quality of the sport, which is surely selected in teams run by the not the desirable end. The BCCI association. As observed at multiple and the various associations, places in this order, as such, these including the HCA, are advised to selections may not appear to fall earnestly introspect on this issue, within the scope of conflict of and consider the best way forward, interest, but if teams are for the sake of the sport. With these consistently made up of children or observations, this application now relatives of office bearers, there are stands disposed off. likely to be questions raised about

APPLICANT: P.L. JHAWAR AND ORS ORDER

This application, numbered as passed an interim order on 15 Application No. 1 of 2015, was February 2016, whereby, among disposed of by the Ombudsman other things, it directed the NCC to through an order dated 17 March make available the names and 2016. In the said application, the contact details of its office bearers, Applicant, Mr. P.L. Jhawar and as well as its entire member list on Ors. made certain allegations with its website. The Respondents were respect to the National Cricket Club also directed to furnish this list to (NCC), Kolkata and Mr. K.P. the Office of the Ombudsman Kajaria, then Secretary and within two days. After giving a Director of NCC, accusing him of personal hearing to the parties, the being guilty of misconduct as an Ombudsman decided not to Administrator. The Ombudsman entertain the application because of

P a g e | 52 some jurisdiction issues. However, asking them to take appropriate in light of the allegations of non- action at the earliest. However, the transparency and nonutilization of Ombudsman has not received any funds by NCC, the Ombudsman reply from BCCI or from the recommended that the BCCI call Respondents. On 27 April 2016 and for reports from all affiliated units 18 July 2016, the Ombudsman for the last ten years regarding the received further communication utilisation of funds given by the from the Applicants, reiterating BCCI to such units, and call for their submissions with respect to explanations, where necessary. The non-compliance of the Ombudsman also recommended Ombudsman’s interim order. The that the BCCI may consider laying Ombudsman notes that in Chapter down a regular reporting 8 of its Report, the Lodha mechanism obliging all affiliated Committee dealt in detail with units to make such reports at issues regarding transparency. The frequent, preferably at least annual Supreme Court in its recent intervals, and requested the BCCI judgment in Board of Control for to inform its office of the steps Cricket vs Cricket Association of taken in this regard. On 13 April Bihar and Ors in paragraphs 75-55 2016, the Office of the Ombudsman referred to the importance and received an email from the need for transparency and financial Applicants stating that the NCC oversight into the affairs of State and Mr. Kajaria (the Respondents Associations and BCCI. In view of herein) had refused to provide the the above, the Ombudsman is Applicants with a membership list issuing a show cause notice to the and address details, despite many NCC, Kolkata as to why, in light of requests, and in violation of the its continued violation of the interim order of the Ombudsman of Ombudsman’s order, BCCI should 15 February 2016. The Ombudsman not be directed to stop its funding forwarded this communication to to the NCC. NCC is given two the BCCI Office Bearers, along with weeks, i.e. 12 August 2016 to reply. a copy to NCC on the same day,

P a g e | 53

RESPONDENT: MR. K SRINIVASAN ORDER

This application, numbered as Mr. K. Srinivasan is the official Application No. 42 of 2016, was coach of the first division clubs of received by the Ombudsman from the TNCA, which are owned by the Mr. Srinivason Sampathkumar on Vice President of the TNCA. This 14 July 2016. The application holding of multiple positions is pertains to allegations of conflict of alleged to be a conflict of interest. interest against Mr. K. Srinivasan. The Ombudsman has thoroughly It is alleged that Mr. K. Srinivasan examined the application, but does is currently on the panel of umpires not feel that that there is any case under the BCCI and is also the of conflict of interest as per the Chairman of the Umpires BCCI Rules. Hence, the complaint Committee of the Tamil Nadu against Mr. K. Srinivasan is Cricket Association (TNCA). Apart dismissed without issuing notice. from this, the Applicant states that

APPLICANT: ANONYMOUS ORDER

This application, numbered as opportunity till 16.07.2016 to Mr. Application No. 34 of 2016, Dodda Ganesh and Mr. N. Girish to received by the Ombudsman as an file their replies. The allegation anonymous communication on 14 against Mr. Ganesh was that is a May 2016, pertains to various member of the Managing persons associated with the Committee of KSCA whilst being an Karnataka State Cricket Association employee if Air India and a coach (“KSCA”). Vide order dated in the KSCA-IDBI Academy. 06.07.2016, the Ombudsman had partially disposed of the Application and given a last

P a g e | 54

#9 COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORTS

Image courtesy :Bertrand-sport-avocat.com

CAS DISMISSES THE APPEAL FILED BY ALEX SCHWAZER () AND IMPOSES AN 8-YEAR PERIOD OF INELIGIBILITY ON HIM

The Court of Arbitration for Sport period of ineligibility starting on the (CAS) has dismissed the appeal filed by date of today, less any period of the Italian racewalker Alex Schwazer provisional suspension effectively who challenged the provisional served as of 8 July 2016. All suspension imposed on him by the competitive results obtained by Alex International Association of Athletics Schwazer from and including 1 Federations (IAAF). Furthermore, the January 2016 are disqualified with all CAS sanctioned him with an eight-year resulting consequences, including

P a g e | 55 forfeiture of medals, points and prizes. on 14 July 2016 challenging the IAAF’s On 18 July 2016, the CAS already decision to impose a provisional dismissed an urgent request for suspension on him. Following the provisional measures filed by the decision rejecting the request for athlete. On 8 May 2016, the athlete provisional measures, the parties, at returned to competition following the the suggestion of CAS, agreed to an expiry of a period of ineligibility expedited arbitration procedure with a imposed upon him in relation to an hearing, in presence of the athlete, in anti-doping rule violation committed Rio de Janeiro on 8 August 2016 in shortly before the London 2012 order that a final decision on the Olympic Games. On 8 July 2016, the merits of the case be issued prior to the athlete was provisionally suspended by Rio 2016 Olympic Games. The IAAF, the IAAF while an investigation into a the Italian National Anti-doping new alleged anti-doping rule violation Organization (NADO Italia), FIDAL was carried out by the Italian Athletics and the World Anti-doping Agency Federation (FIDAL). Alex Schwazer (WADA) were the Respondents in this filed a statement of appeal and request arbitration procedure. for provisional measures with the CAS

ROWING : THE APPEAL OF ANASTASIA KARABELSHIKOVA AND IVAN PODSHIVALOV IS PARTIALLY UPHELD BY CAS POINT 3 OF THE IOC EXECUTIVE BOARD’S DECISION DATED 24 JULY 2016 IS UNENFORCEABLE

The ad hoc Division of the Court of International Rowing Federation Arbitration for Sport (CAS) at the (FISA). In 2008, both athletes received Olympic Games Rio 2016 has rendered a sanction of 2 years ineligibility from its decision in the case Anastasia FISA’s Doping Hearing Panel as a Karabelshikova & Ivan Podshivalov v/ result of an anti-doping rule violation

P a g e | 56

(an “ADRV”) under Article 2.2 of entry or accreditation for the Olympic FISA’s Anti-Doping Rules. On 24 July Games. • The IFs will also have to 2016, the IOC Executive Board issued apply their respective rules in relation a decision (the IOC Decision) setting to the sanctioning of entire NFs. 3. The forth criteria for the participation of ROC is not allowed to enter any athlete Russian athletes which read as follows for the Olympic Games Rio 2016 who (points 2 and 3 only): “2. Entry will be has ever been sanctioned for doping, accepted by the IOC only if an athlete even if he or she has served the is able to provide evidence to the full sanction.” The issues before the CAS satisfaction of his or her International Panel focused primarily upon the Federation (IF) in relation to the legality of paragraph 3 of the IOC following criteria: • The IFs*, when Decision. The IOC Decision deprives establishing their pool of eligible the Russian athletes of the Russian athletes, to apply the World presumption of innocence and rather Anti-Doping Code and other principles establishes a presumption of guilt, but agreed by the Olympic Summit (21 one that is rebuttable by the athletes June 2016). • The absence of a positive on an individual basis. The CAS noted national anti-doping test cannot be the clear and correct references to the considered sufficient by the IFs. • The rules of natural justice. These rules act IFs should carry out an individual to limit the autonomy of the IOC, but analysis of each athlete’s anti-doping such limitation was voluntarily record, taking into account only adopted by the IOC itself. Paragraph 2 reliable adequate international tests, of the Decision follows the and the specificities of the athlete’s introductory wording in the IOC sport and its rules, in order to ensure a Decision and establishes 5 bullet level playing field. • The IFs to examine points of conditions that must be the information contained in the IP fulfilled, which, in the opinion of the Report, and for such purpose seek Panel, further recognise the right of from WADA the names of athletes and the individual athletes to natural National Federations (NFs) implicated. justice. Paragraph 3, on the other Nobody implicated, be it an athlete, an hand, contains a simple, unqualified official, or an NF, may be accepted for and absolute criterion. Any athlete who

P a g e | 57 has been convicted of a prior ADRV is prayers for relief have been rejected, not allowed by the Russian Olympic including the request to oblige FISA to Committee (ROC) to be entered for the allow the Applicants to participate at Rio Games. It is therefore difficult to the Rio 2016 Olympic regatta and the reconcile this paragraph with the request to oblige the IOC to accept stated aim to provide the athletes with entry of the athletes in the 2016 Rio an opportunity to rebut the Olympic Games. The CAS Panel presumption of guilt and to recognise supported the approach taken by the the right to natural justice. As a IOC at paragraph 2. As paragraph 3 is consequence, the CAS Panel found that unenforceable, the two athletes should paragraph 3 of the IOC Decision is be considered by FISA, pursuant to unenforceable as it does not respect paragraph 2 of the IOC Decision, to the athletes’ right of natural justice. determine their eligibility or not, The appeal has been partially upheld without delay. on that limited ground but all other

SWIMMING : THE APPEAL OF YULIA EFIMOVA IS PARTIALLY UPHELD BY CAS POINT 3 OF THE IOC EXECUTIVE BOARD’S DECISION DATED 24 JULY 2016 IS UNENFORCEABLE

The ad hoc Division of the Court of International Rowing Federation Arbitration for Sport (CAS) at the (FISA), which was decided earlier Olympic Games Rio 2016 has rendered today by a CAS Panel, the Panel of CAS its decision in the case Yulia Efimova arbitrators in charge of this matter also v/ Russian Olympic Committee (ROC), confirmed that point 3 of the IOC the International Olympic Committee Executive Board’s decision of 24 July (IOC) and the International Swimming 2016 is unenforceable. As a Federation (FINA). Like in the case consequence, the appeal has been Karabelshikova & Podshivalov v/ partially upheld on that limited ground

P a g e | 58 but all other prayers for relief have oblige the IOC to accept the entry of been rejected, including 1) the request Yulia Efimova to compete in the Rio that Yulia Efimova be directly declared 2016 Olympic Games. The full award eligible to participate in the Rio 2016 with the grounds will be published on Olympic Games and 2) the request to the CAS website on 5 August 2016.

ATHLETICS – ANTI-DOPING CAS DISMISSES THE APPEAL FILED BY ALEX SCHWAZER (ITALY) AND IMPOSES AN 8-YEAR PERIOD OF INELIGIBILITY ON HIM

The Court of Arbitration for Sport provisional measures filed by the (CAS) has dismissed the appeal filed by athlete. On 8 May 2016, the athlete the Italian racewalker Alex Schwazer returned to competition following the who challenged the provisional expiry of a period of ineligibility suspension imposed on him by the imposed upon him in relation to an International Association of Athletics anti-doping rule violation committed Federations (IAAF). Furthermore, the shortly before the London 2012 CAS sanctioned him with an eight-year Olympic Games. On 8 July 2016, the period of ineligibility starting on the athlete was provisionally suspended by date of today, less any period of the IAAF while an investigation into a provisional suspension effectively new alleged anti-doping rule violation served as of 8 July 2016. All was carried out by the Italian Athletics competitive results obtained by Alex Federation (FIDAL). Alex Schwazer Schwazer from and including 1 filed a statement of appeal and request January 2016 are disqualified with all for provisional measures with the CAS resulting consequences, including on 14 July 2016 challenging the IAAF’s forfeiture of medals, points and prizes. decision to impose a provisional On 18 July 2016, the CAS already suspension on him. Following the dismissed an urgent request for decision rejecting the request for

P a g e | 59 provisional measures, the parties, at Rio 2016 Olympic Games. The IAAF, the suggestion of CAS, agreed to an the Italian National Anti-doping expedited arbitration procedure with a Organization (NADO Italia), FIDAL hearing, in presence of the athlete, in and the World Anti-doping Agency Rio de Janeiro on 8 August 2016 in (WADA) were the Respondents in this order that a final decision on the arbitration procedure. merits of the case be issued prior to the

WEIGHTLIFTING – ANTI-DOPING THE COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT (CAS) DISMISSES THE APPEAL OF ALEXEI LOVCHEV

The Court of Arbitration for Sport ipamorelin, a growth hormone (CAS) has dismissed the appeal filed by releasing peptide). Accordingly, the the Russian weightlifter Alexei IWF decision is confirmed in full. Lovchev against a decision issued by Alexei Lovchev filed an appeal at the the International Weightlifting CAS on 1 June 2016 seeking to obtain Federation (IWF) on 13 May 2016 in an annulment of the IWF decision. The which a four-year period of ineligibility Panel of CAS arbitrators appointed to was imposed on the athlete, and his decide the matter held a hearing at the results at the 2015 IWF World CAS Court Office on 6 July 2016 and Championships were cancelled, further has notified its decision to the parties to an anti-doping rule infraction today. (positive anti-doping test for

ATHLETICS – ANTI-DOPING CAS DISMISSES URGENT REQUEST FOR PROVISIONAL MEASURES FILED BY ALEX SCHWAZER

P a g e | 60

The Court of Arbitration for Sport decision to impose a provisional (CAS) has dismissed an urgent request suspension on him and the decision of for provisional measures filed by the the Tribunale Nazionale Antidoping Italian racewalker Alex Schwazer who (TNA) of 11 July 2016, denying sought an order from the CAS lifting jurisdiction to rule on the Athlete’s his provisional suspension from request to set aside the suspension competition. On 8 May 2016, the imposed by the IAAF. The IAAF, the athlete returned to competition Italian Olympic Committee (CONI) following the expiry of a period of and FIDAL filed written submissions ineligibility imposed upon him in which were considered by the relation to an anti-doping rule President of the CAS Appeals violation committed shortly before the Arbitration Division together with the London 2012 Olympic Games. On 8 Athlete’s submissions when she July 2016, the athlete was rendered her Order dismissing the provisionally suspended by the athlete’s request for provisional International Association of Athletics measures. With respect to the next Federations (IAAF) while an steps, the CAS has suggested to the investigation into a new alleged anti- parties that, with their consent, an doping rule violation is carried out by expedited arbitration procedure be the Italian Athletics Federation conducted by CAS so that a final (FIDAL). Alex Schwazer filed a decision on the merits can be issued as statement of appeal and request for soon as possible. provisional measures with the CAS on

14 July 2016 challenging the IAAF’s

THE COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT (CAS) REJECTS THE CLAIMS/APPEAL OF THE RUSSIAN OLYMPIC COMMITTEE (ROC) AND OF 68 RUSSIAN ATHLETES

P a g e | 61

The Court of Arbitration for Sport meeting the qualification standards for (CAS) has issued its decisions in the his or her event). On 15 July 2016, 67 arbitrations between the Russian Russian athletes filed an appeal Olympic Committee (ROC), a number against the IAAF decisions to deny of Russian athletes (the Claimant applications from these athletes to Athletes) and the International compete internationally as "neutral Association of Athletics Federations athletes" at the 2016 Olympic Games (IAAF). The CAS has dismissed both in Rio. The arbitrations were referred the request for arbitration filed by the to a Panel of CAS arbitrators: Prof. ROC and 68 Claimant Athletes, and Luigi Fumagalli, Italy (President), Mr the appeal filed by 67 of the same Jeffrey G. Benz, and His athletes against the IAAF decision to Honour James Robert Reid QC, United consider them as ineligible for the Kingdom. The Panel held a hearing Olympic Games in Rio. On 13 with the parties on 19 July 2016. The November 2015, the IAAF suspended CAS Panel has confirmed the validity the All Athletics Federation of the IAAF’s decision to apply Rules (ARAF) from IAAF membership. Such 22.1(a) and 22.1A of the IAAF suspension was confirmed on 26 Competition Rules, which state that November 2015 and again on 17 June athletes whose national federation is 2016. In a request for arbitration filed suspended by the IAAF are ineligible at the CAS on 3 July 2016, the ROC for competitions held under the IAAF and the 68 Claimant Athletes asked the Rules, in accordance with the Olympic CAS 1) to review specific legal issues, Tribunal Charter, unless they satisfy limited to the validity, enforceability specific criteria. Accordingly, since the and scope of IAAF Competition Rules national federation governing athletics 22.1(a) and 22.1A, and 2) to order that in Russia (ARAF, now RUSAF) is any Russian athlete who was not currently suspended from IAAF currently the subject of any period of membership, its athletes who do not ineligibility for the commission of an satisfy the conditions set by Rule anti-doping rule violation be declared 22.1(A) are ineligible for competitions eligible to participate at the 2016 held under the IAAF Rules. These Olympic Games in Rio (subject to competitions include the athletics

P a g e | 62 events at the 2016 Olympic Games in Games. For the same reason, the CAS Rio. As a consequence, the CAS Panel found that it had no jurisdiction to confirmed that the ROC is not entitled determine whether the IOC is entitled to nominate Russian track and field to accept or refuse the entry either as athletes to compete at the Rio 2016 representatives of the Russian Olympic Games considering that they Federation or as “neutral athletes” of are not eligible to participate under the the Russian track and field athletes IAAF competition rules, in accordance entered by the ROC. With respect to with the Olympic Charter. However, the new IAAF Rule 22.1A, the CAS the ROC is entitled to enter as Panel was concerned about the representatives of the Russian immediate application with retroactive Federation in the Rio 2016 Olympic effect of such Rule, implemented by Games the Russian track and field the IAAF on 17 June 2016, providing athletes who fulfil the criteria and are for exceptional criteria to grant eligible to compete under IAAF eligibility to athletes whose national Competition Rule 22.1A. Since the federation is suspended. Since such International Olympic Committee Rule involves criteria based on long- (IOC) was not a party in the term prior activity, it left no possibility arbitrations, the CAS found that it had in practice, and as applied, for the no jurisdiction to determine whether Claimant Athletes to be able to try to the IOC is entitled generally to accept comply with them. In view of the or refuse the nomination by ROC of urgency of the matter, the CAS Panel Russian track and field athletes to has issued only its decision, which is compete at the Rio 2016 Olympic unanimous, without the grounds.

RIO 2016 OLYMPIC GAMES THE COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT (CAS) HAS OPENED ITS TWO TEMPORARY OFFICES TO RESOLVE LEGAL

P a g e | 63

DISPUTES AND DOPING CASES ON THE SITE OF THE RIO 2016 OLYMPIC GAMES

The Court of Arbitration for Sport accordance with the IOC Anti-doping (CAS) has opened two temporary Rules. The CAS Anti-doping Division divisions on the site of the Rio 2016 will adjudicate on these cases after Olympic Games. They will operate hearing the parties concerned. It may every day until they close on Sunday 21 also impose provisional suspensions August 2016. The CAS Anti-doping pending the conclusion of the Division For the first time in the procedure. Final decisions rendered by history of the Olympic Games, the CAS the CAS Anti-doping Division may be will be in charge of doping-related appealed before the CAS ad hoc matters arising on the occasion of the Division in Rio or before the CAS in Games as a first-instance authority. Lausanne after the end of the Olympic This new structure will handle Games. potential doping cases referred to it in

CROSS COUNTRY SKIING – ANTI DOPING COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT (CAS) DECISION CONCERNING MARTIN JOHNSRUD SUNDBY

The Court of Arbitration for Sport of two months starting on 11 July 2016 (CAS) has upheld an appeal filed by following an anti-doping rule the World Anti-Doping Agency infraction for salbutamol, a medication (WADA) against the Norwegian cross used by the athlete to treat asthma. country skier Martin Johnsrud Sundby The results obtained by the athlete on and the International Ski Federation 13 December 2014 in Davos (SUI) and (FIS). The decision taken on 4 on 8 January 2015 in Toblach (ITA) September 2015 by the FIS Doping are annulled. On 13 December 2014 Panel is set aside and the athlete is and 8 January 2015, the athlete sanctioned with a period of ineligibility underwent in-competition doping

P a g e | 64 controls which returned adverse violation. In determining the sanction, analytical findings for salbutamol in the Panel found that there was medical levels exceeding the applicable justification for the athlete’s use of reporting limits. Following an salbutamol, that his degree of fault was investigation, the FIS Doping Panel light and therefore warranted the found that the abnormal results of the imposition of a suspension shorter analyses did not constitute an anti- than the standard measure for such doping rule violation and took no cases, in this instance, a two-month further action against the athlete. On period of ineligibility. Furthermore, 12 October 2015, WADA filed a pursuant to the FIS rules, the results statement of appeal at the CAS achieved in the competition concerned challenging the FIS Doping Panel’s shall always, be disqualified by the decision and requesting that it be set hearing panel with no exception, aside. The arbitration was referred to a irrespective of an athlete’s light degree panel of CAS arbitrators who held a of fault, as is the case involving Mr. hearing on 25 and 26 May 2016. The Sundby. arbitration centred on the athlete’s administration of his asthma medication, salbutamol, with the use of a nebulizer. In its decision, the CAS Panel found that the method of ingestion (i.e. inhalation) must be distinguished from other forms of administration such as ingestion or injection, and that the dosage allowed under the FIS Anti-Doping Regulations must be understood as the prescribed “labelled” dosage. Any use of salbutamol with a nebulizer beyond such “labelled” dose, without a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE), constituted an anti-doping rule

P a g e | 65

#10 CASE LAW ALERT

Image courtesy:media.licdn.com

Ivan Balandin v. FISA & IOC

The Applicant is Mr. Ivan Balandin Switzerland. One of its primary (the “Athlete”), a rower from Russia. responsibilities is to organise, plan, The First Respondent is the World oversee and sanction the summer and Rowing Federation (“FISA”), based in winter Olympic Games, fulfilling the Lausanne, Switzerland, the mission, role and responsibilities organisation responsible for the sport assigned by the Olympic Charter. The of rowing. First Interested Party is the Russian Rowing Federation (the “RRF”) based The Second Respondent is the in Moscow, Russia. International Olympic Committee (the “IOC”), the organisation responsible The organisation responsible for the for the Olympic Movement, having its sport of rowing in Russia. The Second headquarters in Lausanne, Interested Party is the Russian

P a g e | 66

Olympic Committee (the “ROC”) based (the “Rio Games”) to be registered by in Moscow, Russia, the National the IOC. The Athlete’s name was Olympic Committee for Russia 1.6 The among those notified to the IOC. On 18 Third Interested Party is the World July 2016, WADA’s Independent Anti-Doping Agency (“WADA”), based Person, Mr. Richard McLaren, in Montreal, Canada, the organisation published on the WADA website its responsible for anti-doping in the official independent report (the world. “McLaren Report” or the “IP Report”) describing a fraudulent, government FACTS directed scheme to protect Russian On 21 May 2013, an anti-doping test athletes from anti-doping rule sample was collected from the Athlete violations (“ADRVs”), including during and given number 2781155. On 27 May the Sochi Winter Games. On 24 July 2013 at 17:42 (time of Moscow), after 2016, the IOC Executive Board issued the sample had been forensically tested a decision (the “IOC Decision”) by the Moscow Laboratory, an concerning the participation of unnamed individual from that Russian athletes in the Rio Games. Laboratory reported to Alexey According to this decision the Velikodniy that sample 2781155 following was stated: “Entry will be showed traces of the prohibited accepted by the IOC only if an athlete substance GW 1516. On 28 May 2013 is able to provide evidence to the full at 13.02 (time of Moscow time), Mr satisfaction of his or her International Velikodniy responded to the Moscow Federation (IF) in relation. The IFs Laboratory with the instruction to should carry out an individual analysis “SAVE-WARN”. On 7 June 2013, the of each athlete’s anti-doping record, sample of the Athlete was reported as taking into account only reliable “negative” on ADAMS. adequate international tests, and the Before 18 July 2016, the ROC sent the specificities of the athlete’s sport and names of the 26 rowers and two its rules, in order to ensure a level coxswains that were qualified for the playing field. The IFs to examine the 2016 Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro information contained in the IP

P a g e | 67

Report, and for such purpose seek who confirmed to him that the sample from WADA the names of the Athletes had been collected on 21 May 2013. and National Federations (NFs) On 27 July 2016, FISA issued the implicated. Nobody implicated, be it following (the “FISA Statement”): an athlete, an official, or an NF, may be accepted for entry or accreditation for “FISA has examined the IP Report and the Olympic Games.” the relevant details provided by WADA, and has identified one rower On 25 July 2016, the FISA Executive entered by the ROC who is implicated. Committee met to evaluate the Consequently and for this reason, this conditions for participation athlete will not be included in the list established by the IOC and to comply of rowers declared eligible as it is with the IOC Decision. FISA, in understood that the IOC will not compliance with paragraph 2 of the accept his entry.” IOC Decision, received from WADA information from the McLaren Report On 27 July 2016, the RRF was notified confirming that 11 rowers had their of the entire FISA Statement. On 2 samples tested and then reviewed by August 2016, the IOC issued a letter to the Russian Deputy Minister of Sport. the Summer International Federations, Six (6) of these were “SAVE” cases, which stated: “…the IOC considers it including the Athlete. FISA necessary to clarify the meaning of the additionally checked on the ADAMS notion « implicated » in the EB system and noted that the test was Decision. The IOC does not consider reported as negative. As the date of that each athlete referred to in the sample collection was missing (or McLaren Lists shall be considered per marked “N/A”) on the information se. It is for each International supplied to it, Matthew Smith, from Federation to assess, on the basis of FISA, additionally spoke to Emma the information provided in the Price from UK Anti-Doping, who was McLaren Lists and the Independent reviewing the testing results and Person Report, whether it is satisfied procedures at the Moscow Laboratory, that the athlete in question was « implicated » in the Russian State-

P a g e | 68 controlled doping scheme. To assist Article 1 of the CAS Arbitration Rules the International Federations in for the Olympic Games (the “CAS Ad assessing each individual case, the IOC Hoc Rules”) provides as follows: wishes to provide some information. In “Article 1. Application of the Present the IOC’s opinion, an athlete should Rules and Jurisdiction of the Court of not be considered as «implicated » Arbitration for Sport (CAS) The where: purpose of the present Rules is to provide, in the interests of the athletes  The order was a « quarantine »; and of sport, for the resolution by The McLaren List does not refer to a arbitration of any disputes covered by prohibited substance which would Rule 61 of the Olympic Charter, insofar have given rise to an anti-doping rule as they arise during the Olympic violation; or Games or during a period of ten days preceding the Opening Ceremony of The McLaren List does not refer to the Olympic Games. In the case of a any prohibited substance with respect request for arbitration against a to a given sample.” decision pronounced by the IOC, an

NOC, an International Federation or an Organising Committee for the JURISDICTION AND Olympic Games, the claimant must, ADMISSIBILITY before filing such request, have Article 61.2 of the Olympic Charter exhausted all the internal remedies provides as follows: “61 Dispute available to him/her pursuant to the Resolution [...] 2. Any dispute arising statutes or regulations of the sports on the occasion of, or in connection body concerned, unless the time with, the Olympic Games shall be needed to exhaust the internal submitted exclusively to the Court of remedies would make the appeal to the Arbitration for Sport (CAS), in CAS Ad Hoc Division ineffective”. accordance with the Code of Sports- At the outset of the hearing, the Panel Related Arbitration”. discussed with the Parties the fact that the IOC Decision and the FISA

P a g e | 69

Statement were both rendered before result of the express choice of law the CAS Ad Hoc “window” opened, 10 contained in Article 17 of the CAS Ad days before the Opening Ceremony of Hoc Rules and as the result of the the Rio Games. The Parties choice of Lausanne, Switzerland as the acknowledged that while theoretically seat of the ad hoc Division and of its there may be issues as to when the panels of arbitrators, pursuant to “dispute” arose, all Parties expressly Article 7 of the CAS Ad Hoc Rules. 6.4 waived any such issues and expressly According to Article 16 of the CAS Ad confirmed that they wanted the Panel Hoc Rules, the Panel has “full power to to treat the dispute as admissible and establish the facts on which the to proceed to render this Award. application is based”.

APPLICABLE LAW Position of the Athlete

Under Article 17 of the CAS Ad Hoc In summary, the Athlete finds that the Rules, the Panel must decide the IOC Decision and the FISA Statement, dispute “pursuant to the Olympic which it also regards as a decision, are Charter, the applicable regulations, illegal and should be recognised as general principles of law and the rules “null and void”. These bodies have of law, the application of which it assumed an ADRV. If this is the case, deems appropriate”. The Parties also then the dispute is an antidoping referred in their submission to Swiss dispute and should have followed the law regarding the legal position of a applicable Anti-Doping Regulations, Swiss Association. The Panel hereby which FISA has not done. Additionally, confirmed that these proceedings are no reliance can be made on the governed by the CAS Ad Hoc Rules McLaren report as evidence, as it is not enacted by the International Council of complete, it has secret parts that were Arbitration for Sport ("ICAS") on 14 not shared with or available to the October 2003. They are further Athlete and there was no date of the governed by Chapter 12 of the Swiss sample taking in the information that Private International Law Act of 18 Mr McLaren provided. There had also December 1987 ("PIL Act"). The PIL been breaches of procedural fairness Act applies to this arbitration as a by the Respondents, including a

P a g e | 70 breach of their duty of good faith and McLaren Report and by Mr. McLaren’s providing the Athlete with a right to be own amicus curiae. The athlete was heard. Position of FISA FISA “saved”; the substance was prohibited submitted that it should not be a at all times and would result in an Respondent in this matter. The FISA ADRV if found in his sample, which Mr Statement does not represent a McLaren was satisfied, beyond a decision at all, as it did not concern the reasonable doubt, that it was. Finally, Athlete. Rather, FISA noted the clear the IOC explained why the matter at wording of paragraph 2 of the IOC hand was not an anti-doping one, as Decision: “Nobody implicated, be it an the Athlete attempted to portray it as. athlete, an official, or an NF, may be WADA assisted the Panel by providing accepted for entry or accreditation for an explanation of the “disappearing the Olympic Games.” positives methodology (“DPM”). Mr FISA applied the criterion and was McLaren noted that samples from satisfied that the Athlete was “clearly athletes were initially screened implicated” by the McLaren Report analytically, which would reveal if the and was therefore excluded from the A sample was likely to reveal an ADRV. Rio Games. No test is 100% accurate at this stage, but this screening is reliable. If a likely In its Reply, the IOC first recalled the positive result was found then the principles of autonomy applicable to laboratory would, through RUSADA any Swiss association such as the IOC communicating through a liaison, which provided it with the freedom of communicate this fact and the identity association and the right to produce of the athlete to the Deputy Minister of the IOC Decision. It explained the Sport. He, in turn, would issue a “save” reasoning behind and the CAS OG or “quarantine” order back down the 16/12 – Page 8 extraordinary line to the laboratory. If the order was circumstances that resulted in the IOC “save” the laboratory would record the Decision and drew parallels with the test result as negative in ADAMS and position adopted by the IAAF. Finally, manipulate their own non-auditable it submitted that the Athlete had version of their Laboratory clearly been “implicated” by the

P a g e | 71

Information Management System. 7.8 athlete to have his/her case WADA also provided their view that individually considered. The IOC the Athlete’s submission that the Decision stated: “Under these matter at hand is a doping matter is exceptional circumstances, Russian wide of the mark. The matter at hand athletes in any of the 28 Olympic is an eligibility issue. summer sports have to assume the consequences of what amounts to a

collective responsibility in order to Paragraph 2 of the IOC Decision protect the credibility of the Olympic competitions, and the “presumption of The Panel noted that the timing of the innocence” cannot be applied to them. McLaren Report put the IOC in an On the other hand, according to the invidious position, so close to the Rio rules of natural justice, individual Games. As the IOC submitted, the justice, to which every human being is McLaren Report revealed a State- entitled, has to be applied. This means organised doping scheme in Russia, that each affected athlete must be involving the Deputy Minister of Sport, given the opportunity to rebut the sample swapping during the Winter applicability of the collective Olympic Games Sochi 2014 and responsibility in his or her individual falsification of analysis by the Moscow case.” laboratory on the orders of the Deputy Minister of Sport. The IOC faced calls The IOC Decision went on to establish from a significant part of the anti- the criteria that any individual Russian doping community to ban all the ROC athlete would need to meet in order to and all its athletes of any sport from be eligible for the Rio Games. The competing at the Rio Games. The IOC criteria that is relevant for this matter decided not to do so. Instead, the was contained in paragraph 2 of the Executive Board of the IOC decided to IOC Decision. The Panel notes that for strike a balance between the collective any athlete that has attained the responsibility applying to Russian necessary sporting levels required for athletes in view of these exceptional the Rio Games, he or she must first be circumstances and the right of each deemed eligible to compete by their

P a g e | 72 sport’s International Federation; 1 athlete had successfully been deemed secondly, their country’s Olympic eligible to participate at the Rio Committee must then determine which Games. The IOC also noted that the eligible athletes to enter into the IAAF rules had been supported by a Games; and finally, the IOC will accept recent CAS decision. This Panel notes such athletes or not, pursuant to Rule all the IOC’s submissions regarding its 44.3 of the Olympic Charter. The ability as a Swiss association to have criteria set at paragraph 2 of the IOC significant autonomy to establish its Decision were directed at the own rules, including those in the IOC International Federations; in the case Decision, which it further notes has at hand, FISA. The Panel has no been accepted practically on a doubts at all that the IOC acted in good unanimous basis by its members. faith and with the best of intentions Having noted the background to the when issuing such decision. The IOC IOC Decision, the Panel now examines confirmed that the aim of these criteria its contents. The IOC Decision acts to was to give an opportunity to those deprive the Russian athletes of the Russian athletes who were not presumption of innocence and rather implicated in the State-organised establishes a presumption of guilt, but scheme to participate in the Rio one that is rebuttable by the athletes Games. on an individual basis. The Panel notes in particular the clear and correct The IOC noted that the IAAF had references to the rules of natural “acted in an identical manner” with justice. These rules act to limit the respect to the Russian track and field autonomy of the IOC, but such athletes. The IAAF suspended the limitation was voluntarily adopted by Russian Athletics Federation, which the IOC itself. Paragraph 2 follows the resulted in the IAAF Competition introductory wording in the IOC Rules being amended to include a new Decision and establishes 5 bullet Rule 22.1 (A) on the eligibility of points of conditions that must be individual athletes. The IOC submitted fulfilled, which, in the opinion of the that the criteria established by the Panel, further recognise the right of IAAF was stricter than its own, as only the individual athletes to natural

P a g e | 73 justice. As such, the Panel sees no who imposed the additional eligibility reason to declare paragraph 2 of the criteria specifically on Russian IOC Decision, which is the part athletes. FISA only implemented and challenged by the athlete in this applied these criteria to its Russian procedure, null and void. It respects athletes. This neither constitutes a the IOC’s autonomy and that the IOC breach of the principle of venire voluntarily limited that by factum propium nor a breach of good incorporating the rules of natural faith. This is all the more true, since justice and directing the International the Athletes specifically and repeatedly Federations to carry out an individual stated that they do not wish to analysis of each athlete, which includes challenge the eligibility criteria looking at the testing history of each, established by the IOC Executive where such tests took place, whether Board in its decision dated 24 July Mr McLaren had noted anything in his 2016. The Athletes’ reference to CAS Report, whether the athlete had been 98/200, according to which it implicated as being involved in and/or constitutes – allegedly – a violation of benefiting from such state-sponsored procedural fairness, if a rule is adopted scheme. No breach of good faith, too late, is of no avail here. The procedural fairness, venire contra jurisprudence refers to rules and factum proprium or the right to be regulations and not to the taking of heard evidence, i.e. assessing the testing record of the respective athletes. The Athlete submitted that it Finally, the Panel notes that this is a de constitutes a breach of venire contra novo procedure and that consequently, factum proprium if the qualification procedural mistakes that might have process was changed with occurred at a prior instance are cured retrospective effect. However, as has by the CAS. The Athlete confirmed that been determined in CAS OG 16/11, this his right to be heard and treated is not the case here: “FISA did not equally with the Respondents had been change its eligibility criteria. Instead, it satisfied with the hearing in this was the IOC (that governs and matter. administers the Rio Olympic Games)

P a g e | 74

Paragraph 2 implication Moscow Laboratory that the screen of the Athlete’s A sample revealed The Panel now turns to the position of positive for the prohibited substance FISA and its application of the GW 1516 and the response from the eligibility criteria set out in paragraph. Deputy Minister to change the positive As stated above, FISA’s mission, as set into a negative, following the DPM. out in the fourth bullet point of While these additional details were not paragraph 2, was to check to see if the before FISA (primarily due to the lack athlete was “implicated”; then, of time), they have been considered by pursuant to the IOC letter of 2 August the Panel in this de novo procedure. 2016, it was recognised that some However, even without the details of athletes may be implicated, but did not the emails, the Panel is satisfied that perhaps benefit from the scheme. For the information provided to FISA and example, if the substance in their the additional checks it took with sample was not prohibited, or would UKAD, were sufficient to show the not lead to an ADRV or if the Athlete was “implicated” in this instruction was “quarantine” (as those scheme. athletes were then processed as normal.) 7.28 In the Athlete’s case, he Now considering whether he benefited, did not deny that he was tested and the Panel notes that the substance GW that a sample was taken. Rather, he 1516 is a metabolic modulator and a stated that as Mr McLaren put “n/a” in non-specified substance and is the column for the sample date, this prohibited at all times (without a nullified that information. FISA noted threshold). Further, the instruction that the sample date was missing, but from the Deputy Minister was “save”. took the necessary steps to establish If it had been “quarantine”, then the this date by calling UKAD. Athlete would have been processed Additionally, Mr McLaren, in his under the antidoping regulations. Does amicus curiae, while not providing the this mean he would have received a emails on grounds of confidentiality, ban and as such, the avoiding of this revealed to the Panel the exact date ban would be the benefit? To take that and times of the message from the last step FISA (or now the Panel)

P a g e | 75 would have to be convinced applying the “comfortable satisfaction” threshold. While there were no submissions from the Athlete as to whether FISA/the Panel would have to be reasonably satisfied, comfortably satisfied or satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt, the Panel determines to put the bar, in the case at hand, above reasonable satisfaction. The Panel is comfortably satisfied.

CONCLUSION

In view of the above considerations, the Panel was satisfied that the Athlete was implicated in the state-sponsored anti-doping scheme in Russia and by being “saved” he avoided likely doping sanctions and cannot satisfy the IOC’s eligibility criteria to rebut the presumption of guilt and, as such, assumes responsibility for his part in the scheme. The Athlete’s application filed on 2 August 2016 was dismissed. All other prayers for relief were rejected.

P a g e | 76

#11 FIFA GOVERNANCE AND PROCEEDINGS

Image Courtesy: sputniknews.com

INVESTIGATORY CHAMBER OF THE INDEPENDENT ETHICS COMMITTEE CONCLUDES INVESTIGATION REGARDING WORAWI MAKUDI

The chairman of the investigatory recommendations to the adjudicatory chamber of the independent Ethics chamber of the Ethics Committee, Committee, Dr Cornel Borbély, has which is chaired by Mr Hans-Joachim concluded his investigation into the Eckert. In his final report, the activities of the former President of the chairman of the investigatory chamber FA (FAT) and former FIFA of the Ethics Committee recommended Executive Committee member, imposing a sanction of a ban for no Worawi Makudi, and handed over the less than four years and a fine of no respective report together with less than CHF 25,000 on Mr Makudi

P a g e | 77 for alleged violation of the general Statutes which were not approved by rules of conduct (art. 13 par. 1 to 3 of the FAT Congress. Mr Makudi was the FIFA Code of Ethics (FCE)), loyalty allegedly responsible for the (art. 15 FCE), forgery and falsification alterations and did not inform the (art. 17 FCE) and the obligation of the members of the FAT Congress about parties to collaborate (art. 41 FCE). them. Until a formal decision is taken by the adjudicatory chamber of the The investigation against Mr Makudi Ethics Committee, Mr Makudi is concerned alterations of the FAT presumed innocent.

ADJUDICATORY CHAMBER OF THE INDEPENDENT ETHICS COMMITTEE OPENS ADJUDICATORY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST WORAWI MAKUDI

The adjudicatory chamber of the football-related activity for no less independent Ethics Committee, under than four years and a fine of CHF its chairman Hans-Joachim Eckert, 25,000 for violation of the general has opened formal adjudicatory rules of conduct (art. 13 pars 1 to 3 of proceedings against the former the FIFA Code of Ethics (FCE)), loyalty President of the Thailand FA (FAT) (art. 15 FCE), forgery and falsification and former FIFA Executive Committee (art. 17 FCE), and the obligation of the member Worawi Makudi based on the parties to collaborate (art. 41 FCE). In final report submitted by the the course of the proceedings, Mr investigatory chamber. Makudi will be invited to submit his position including any evidence with The investigations concerning Mr regard to the final report of the Makudi were conducted by Dr Cornel investigatory chamber (art. 70 par. 2 of Borbély, chairman of the investigatory the FCE) and may request a hearing chamber of the Ethics Committee, and (art. 74 par. 2 of the FCE). For reasons the final report was passed to the linked to privacy rights and the adjudicatory chamber on 15 July 2016. presumption of innocence until proven In its final report, the investigatory guilty, the adjudicatory chamber will chamber recommends a ban from all

P a g e | 78 not publish further details at the moment.

INDEPENDENT ETHICS COMMITTEE BANS WOLFGANG NIERSBACH

The adjudicatory chamber of the Cup™, including potential breaches of independent Ethics Committee chaired the FIFA Code of Ethics (FCE). by Alan Sullivan has banned Wolfgang However, the present case did not look Niersbach, former President of the into possible breaches of the FCE in German Football Association (DFB) relation to possible acts of bribery and Vice-President of the 2006 FIFA and/or corruption with regards to the World Cup Local Organising award of the 2006 FIFA World Cup™, Committee (LOC) and current member but only evaluated Mr Niersbach’s of the FIFA Council and the UEFA awareness of the said incidents and his Executive Committee, for 1 year from failure to report them to the Ethics all football-related activities Committee in a timely manner. (administrative, sports or any other) on a national and international level. The Ethics Committee found that the The ban comes into force immediately. conduct of Mr Niersbach as former The investigation against Mr President of the DFB and Vice- Niersbach was conducted by Dr Cornel President of the 2006 FIFA World Cup Borbély, chairman of the investigatory LOC and current member of the FIFA chamber of the Ethics Committee, Council and the UEFA Executive which resulted in a final report being Committee constituted a violation of submitted to the adjudicatory chamber article 18 (Duty of disclosure, on 22 April 2016. Adjudicatory cooperation and reporting) and article proceedings were formally opened on 19 (Conflicts of interest) of the FCE. In 20 May 2016. consequence, Mr Niersbach has been The adjudicatory chamber found that banned for 1 year from all football Mr Niersbach failed to report findings related activities and shall bear the about possible misconduct concerning costs of the proceeding. the awarding of the 2006 FIFA World

P a g e | 79

INDEPENDENT ETHICS COMMITTEE CONCLUDES PROCEEDINGS REGARDING GIANNI INFANTINO After conducting both preliminary and (Offering and accepting gifts) of the formal investigation proceedings, the FCE. The evidence gathered suggested investigatory chamber of the prima facie cases of FCE violations independent Ethics Committee has with regard to several flights taken by decided to conclude its investigations Mr Infantino during the first months concerning FIFA President Gianni of his presidency, human resources Infantino. It was found that no matters related to hiring processes in violation of the FIFA Code of the President’s office, and Mr Ethics (FCE) had been committed by Infantino’s refusal to sign the contract Mr Infantino. The adjudicatory specifying his employment chamber took note of and accepted the relationship with FIFA. In accordance decision of the investigatory chamber. with art. 28 par. 3 of the FCE, Mr The preliminary investigations and the Bourngar decided to open formal formal proceedings followed the proceedings regarding these matters. proceedings stipulated in the FCE. Other allegations related to expenses They included a large number of and governance issues had also been interviews with witnesses and Mr investigated but did not lead to any Infantino himself, as well as an prima facie cases. extensive analysis of evidence, and were supported by independent legal During the formal investigation opinions. The investigations were proceedings, led by Vanessa Allard, carried out diligently over several member of the investigatory chamber, weeks. The preliminary investigations, the materials related to the prima facie led by Djimrabaye Bourngar, deputy cases identified during the preliminary chairman of the investigatory investigations were assessed. After chamber, and assisted by Justice examining all relevant evidence Robert Torres, focused on potential thoroughly, Ms Allard concluded that breaches of art. 13 (General rules of the occurrences related to the flights conduct), art. 15 (Loyalty), art. 19 taken by Mr Infantino did not (Conflicts of interest) and art. 20 represent FCE violations. In particular,

P a g e | 80 no relevant situations involving deputy chairman of the adjudicatory conflicts of interest related to Mr chamber, Hans-Joachim Eckert and Infantino’s position as FIFA President Alan Sullivan, respectively. After were identified, and the benefits review, they did not raise any objection enjoyed by Mr Infantino were not to the investigatory chamber’s decision considered improper in the light of to conclude the investigations. applicable FIFA rules and regulations. Due to his Swiss nationality, Dr Cornel Moreover, Ms Allard found that the Borbély, chairman of the investigatory human resources matters, as well as chamber of the independent Ethics Mr. Infantino’s conduct with regard to Committee, was not involved in the his contract with FIFA, if at all, decision. constituted internal compliance issues In accordance with art. 36 pars 1 and 2 rather than an ethical matter. As such, of the FCE, it was decided not to the final report prepared by Ms Allard communicate Ms Allard’s opening of concluded that no ethical breaches had the formal investigation proceedings in been committed by Mr Infantino. order to ensure independent, unimpaired and focused proceedings In order to guarantee a complete based on the considerable volume of assessment of the allegations, the documents, information and data decisions of the investigatory chamber produced already during the were reviewed by the chairman and the preliminary investigation.

P a g e | 81

#12 RIO OLYMPIC UPDATES

Image Courtesy:stillmed.olympic.org

IOC SESSION RECEIVES UPDATES ON IMPLEMENTATION OF OLYMPIC AGENDA 2020

 IOC Olympic Games Executive IOC Member in the Netherlands Director Christophe Dubi and IOC Camiel Eurlings called the fact that Sports Director Kit McConnell four European National Olympic provided a detailed report on the Committees (from , Germany, implementation of the first three Italy, and Hungary) and the United recommendations of Olympic Agenda States Olympic Committee have 2020 – shaping the bidding process as expressed their commitment to bid for an invitation recommendation, the 2024 Olympic Games a “hopeful evaluating bid cities by assessing key development” that showed just how opportunities and risks, and reducing well-received the Olympic Agenda the cost of bidding. 2020 recommendations have been.

NOC Relations

P a g e | 82

The IOC granted full recognition to the Committee. South Sudan National Olympic Olympic Programme

In line with the Olympic Charter, the 2014, bringing real added value to the Session today approved the programme. programme of the XXIV Olympic

Winter Games Beijing 2022, which is A proposal from the IOC Executive the same as that for the XXII Olympic Board on the possible inclusion of new Winter Games Sochi 2014. The sports events on the programme for the are skiing, biathlon, curling, luge, Olympic Winter Games 2022 would be bobsleigh and skeleton, skating, and presented to the IOC Session before ice hockey. All seven Olympic sports the Olympic Winter Games contributed significantly to the success PyeongChang 2018. of the Olympic Winter Games Sochi World Flying Disc Federation

The World Flying Disc Federation The WFDF is the international (WFDF), meanwhile, was granted full governing body of all flying disc sports, IOC recognition today by the Session. including ultimate, beach ultimate, The IF had been provisionally disc golf, freestyle, guts, and individual recognised in 2013 and is in full events. The IF counts 62 member compliance with IOC requirements as associations that represent flying disc specified in the IOC Recognition sports and their athletes in more than procedure adopted by the IOC 58 countries. Executive Board in April 2007.

IOC Administration, others

P a g e | 83

The Session also heard reports on legal and International Council of affairs, the IOC administration, the Arbitration for Sport (ICAS). World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) IOC PRESIDENT PUTS FOCUS ON UPCOMING GAMES, OLYMPIC AGENDA 2020

 FACEBOOK SHARE Providing details of the IOC Executive best way to take care of them. I am Board meetings that concluded today very confident we will have great in Kuala Lumpur, President Bach told Games next year.” reporters that the Rio de Janeiro Organising Committee for the Olympic Games was preparing well for the 44 The IOC President also praised the test events that are taking place ahead progress being made by organisers of of the Games. the Olympic Winter Games PyeongChang 2018 and Olympic “The situation with Rio de Janeiro is Games Tokyo 2020, the latter of which as always: great progress but no time he said had done an excellent job to lose,” said the IOC President, who embracing the reforms of Olympic will travel to Rio de Janeiro to take Agenda 2020, the IOC’s strategic part in one-year-to-go celebrations on roadmap for the future of the Olympic 5 August. “Great progress has been Movement. made at the Olympic Village and sports venues. The public transportation “We see how they have really being delivered for the Games will be embraced Olympic Agenda 2020,” he ready on time and leave a great legacy said of Tokyo 2020. “Fifty per cent of for the people of Rio de Janeiro.” the venues will now be existing venues. Venues for 26 of the sports have President Bach said the Organising already been approved. They have Committee has acknowledged the saved USD 1.7 billion (from the revised challenges that remain: “which is the Tokyo 2020 construction budget) and

P a g e | 84 hundreds of millions more in savings in the Olympic Winter Games 2018 are in the pipeline with the new host city. She noted the excellent stadium compared to the old project.” quality of venue construction, the increased collaboration with the The Japanese government recently Winter International Federations, and decided not to go ahead with a design attributed the strong progress to the for a new national stadium due to organisation’s new structure. rising construction costs, and will instead hold a tender for a less costly The EB also received an update on the alternative, a decision President Bach implementation of Olympic Agenda said the IOC respects. 2020. “The Host City Contract for 2022 has “We understand the fact that they have been reviewed and will for the first seen dramatic changes in construction time be made public by the IOC on 31 costs compared to the time of bidding,” July,” President Bach said. “The he said. “They have gone through the contract will include the significant roof. This is beyond the control of the anticipated contribution from the IOC Organising Committee and the for the organisers of USD 800 million government. So we respect this or more.” decision and we know that they will deliver a state-of-the-art stadium for The President also commented on the the athletes.” reduction of the Candidature Service Organisers of the Olympic Winter Fee to USD 250,000 from USD Games PyeongChang 2018, 650,000, even with a considerably meanwhile, are making good progress higher level of service provided by the with both construction and marketing, IOC. He said the reduction was in line having increased their revenue target with Recommendation 3 of Olympic by 21 per cent since the last EB Agenda 2020 to reduce the cost of meeting in June. The EB also heard bidding and also as a result of the 18 from IOC Coordination Commission agreements worth some USD 14 billion Chair Gunilla Lindberg, who had just that the IOC has signed since the returned from the fifth Project Review

P a g e | 85

Olympic Winter Games Sochi 2014. Games Buenos Aires 2018, which will This robust financial foundation also result in record female participation. allows the IOC to redistribute more “There will be quite a few innovations than 90 per cent of its revenues to and a more urban approach,” he said. support athletes and sport around the “We will bring sports to the people world — the equivalent of USD 3.25 rather than the people to the sports.” million a day, every day of the year. Joining the Olympic programme for The President said the EB had the first time at Buenos Aires 2018 will approved an innovative sports be, among others, BMX freestyle, programme for the Youth Olympic kiteboarding and beach handball.

OLYMPIC CHANNEL TO LAUNCH ON 21 AUGUST 2016

The International Olympic Committee ouTube, and sign up for Olympic (IOC) today announced the launch Channel updates date for its ground-breaking new at olympicchannel.com. media destination, the Olympic IOC President Thomas Bach said: Channel, where fans can experience “The launch of the Olympic Channel the power of sport and the Olympic on 21st August is the start of an Movement all year round. Starting exciting new journey to connect the Sunday 21 August, after the Closing worldwide audience with the Olympic Ceremony of the Olympic Games Rio Movement all year round. Fans will be 2016, the Olympic Channel platform able to follow sports, athletes and the will be available worldwide via a stories behind the Olympic Games. mobile app for Android and iOS The Olympic Channel will inspire us all devices and atolympicchannel.com. and reach out to new generations of In addition, athletes and fans can athletes and fans.” follow the Olympic Channel on its With the goal of providing a new way newly launched social media handles to engage young people, fans and new onFacebook, Instagram, Twitter and Y

P a g e | 86 audiences in the Olympic Movement, personalised experience, where users the Olympic Channel is a free platform can follow their favourite athletes, that will present original teams, sports and countries to receive programming, live sports events, news an individually-tailored content and highlights offering additional selection. The dynamic environment exposure for sports and athletes all also allows videos to be easily shared year round. Olympic Channel original across social media, and encourages programming will include both short- users to regularly interact with the form and long-form content, focusing Olympic Movement. on elite athletes, their quest for success and sport around the world. After the launch of the global digital product in August, the Olympic Designed for a global audience, the Channel intends to foster partnerships Olympic Channel digital platform will with other Olympic stakeholders, showcase content from around the including rights-holding broadcasters world, and will initially be offered in and National Olympic Committees to English. Additional features at launch develop localised versions of the will include fantastic content as video Olympic Channel. Localised versions on demand, as well as individual sport will offer language-specific user pages within a user-friendly and experiences on digital platforms, and mobile-responsive interface, subtitled will also include linear television in nine different languages. programming options. The Olympic Channel includes an option to register for a richer and more

About the Olympic Channel

The Olympic Channel is a digital-first, values all year round, especially in the multiplatform global Olympic media periods between the Olympic Games. entity, which aims to broadcast the Olympic Movement and its inherent The primary objectives of the Olympic

P a g e | 87

Channel are the following: • As a matter of priority, engage the young generations around the world • Provide a platform for the using methods that are relevant to continuous exposure of Olympic them, building understanding, sports and athletes beyond the entertainment and education. Olympic Games period and help create anticipation while providing At launch, the Olympic Channel will opportunities to "re-live the be a digital platform, with on-demand experience" after the Games content available across the web, • Continuously highlight the relevance mobile, tablet and other connected of the Olympic Movement's ideals to devices, where fans can experience the the challenges of today's world power of sport and Olympism 24 hours per day, 365 days a year. • Provide a platform for sharing the Audiences will also be able to access IOC's very rich patrimonial assets and content and engage through a variety archives with the world and create of social media platforms as part of additional value and content for the the Olympic Channel network. IOC archives IOC APPROVES FIVE NEW SPORTS FOR OLYMPIC GAMES TOKYO 2020

The decision by the 129th IOC Session and reflecting the trend of in Rio de Janeiro was the most urbanisation of sport. comprehensive evolution of the Olympic programme in modern The Organising Committee for the history. Plans call for staging the Tokyo 2020 Games proposed the five skateboarding and sports climbing new sports in response to the new events in temporary venues installed in flexibility provided by Olympic Agenda urban settings, marking a historic step 2020. in bringing the Games to young people

P a g e | 88

Today’s vote was the culmination of a that are popular in Japan and will add two-year process that began with the to the legacy of the Tokyo Games.” unanimous approval of the IOC’s strategic roadmap in 2014. The Tokyo 2020 President Yoshiro Mori recommendation to give Organising said, “The inclusion of the package of Committees the flexibility to propose new sports will afford young athletes new sports for their edition of the the chance of a lifetime to realise their Games was intended to put even more dreams of competing in the Olympic focus on innovation, flexibility and Games – the world's greatest sporting youth in the development Olympic stage – and inspire them to achieve programme. their best, both in sport and in life.”

Tokyo 2020, the first Organising The additional sports in Tokyo will not Committee able to take advantage of impact the athlete or event quotas of the change, submitted its proposal for existing Olympic sports or be binding the five new sports to the IOC in on future host cities. The current September 2015. athlete and event quotas are unaffected. IOC President Thomas Bach said, “We want to take sport to the youth. With The IOC considered a variety of factors the many options that young people when assessing the proposal, including have, we cannot expect any more that the impact on gender equality, the they will come automatically to us. We youth appeal of the sports and the have to go to them. Tokyo 2020’s legacy value of adding them to the balanced proposal fulfils all of the Tokyo Games. goals of the Olympic Agenda 2020 recommendation that allowed it. The inclusion of the new sports will Taken together, the five sports are an add 18 events and 474 athletes, with innovative combination of established equal numbers of women and men for and emerging, youth-focused events all sports except baseball/softball, which will have the same number of

P a g e | 89 teams but different player totals, Discussions on the event programme because softball teams have 15 players in the existing 28 Olympic sports for whilst baseball teams have 24. Tokyo the Olympic Games Tokyo 2020 are 2020 will rely heavily on existing and ongoing, and will be finalised by the temporary venues to stage the IOC Executive Board in mid-2017. competitions.

IOC REVIEW PANEL DECIDES ON THE PARTICIPATION OF RUSSIAN ATHLETES AT THE OLYMPIC GAMES RIO 2016

The IOC Review Panel today corresponding sport, which took into announced the participation list for account only reliable adequate Russian athletes at the Olympic Games international tests, and the specificities Rio 2016. The Executive Board (EB) of the athlete’s sport and its rules, in delegated the final review of entries of order to ensure a level playing field. Russian athletes to this Panel, which was composed of three IOC Executive The Review Panel subsequently Board Members: Uğur Erdener (Chair reviewed the positon of the of the Panel and Chair of the Medical independent arbitrator appointed by and Scientific Commission), Claudia the Court of Arbitration for Sport Bokel (Chair of the Athletes’ (CAS) in relation to the evidence Commission) and Juan Antonio provided to meet those criteria. Samaranch. The result from the IOC Review Panel The full list of criteria is provided at is as follows: the end of this press release. 271 athletes will form the team entered

by the Russian National Olympic The Review Panel based its review on Committee (ROC) from the original the International Federations’ entry list of 389 athletes. decisions in relation to the entry of each individual athlete in their

P a g e | 90

NOTES (THE LIST OF CRITERIA SET BY THE IOC EB ON 24 JULY 2016):

The IOC EB took the following only reliable adequate international decision on 24 July concerning the tests, and the specificities of the participation of Russian athletes in the athlete’s sport and its rules, in order to Olympic Games Rio 2016: ensure a level playing field.

• The IFs to examine the information 1. The IOC will not accept any entry of contained in the IP Report, and for any Russian athlete in the Olympic such purpose seek from WADA the Games Rio 2016 unless such athlete names of athletes and National can meet the conditions set out below. Federations (NFs) implicated. Nobody implicated, be it an athlete, an official, 2. Entry will be accepted by the IOC or an NF, may be accepted for entry or only if an athlete is able to provide accreditation for the Olympic Games. evidence to the full satisfaction of his • The IFs will also have to apply their or her International Federation (IF) in respective rules in relation to the relation to the following criteria: sanctioning of entire NFs. • The IFs*, when establishing their 3. The ROC is not allowed to enter any pool of eligible Russian athletes, to athlete for the Olympic Games Rio apply the World Anti-Doping Code and 2016 who has ever been sanctioned for other principles agreed by the Olympic doping, even if he or she has served the Summit (21 June 2016). sanction. • The absence of a positive national anti-doping test cannot be considered 4. The IOC will accept an entry by the sufficient by the IFs. ROC only if the athlete’s IF is satisfied that the evidence provided meets • The IFs should carry out an conditions 2 and 3 above and if it is individual analysis of each athlete’s upheld by an expert from the CAS list anti-doping record, taking into account

P a g e | 91 of arbitrators appointed by an ICAS procedure by the IOC Disciplinary Member, independent from any sports Commission established on 19 July organisation involved in the Olympic 2016 under the chairmanship of Mr Games Rio 2016. Guy Canivet (Vice-Chair of the IOC Ethics Commission, former member of 5. The entry of any Russian athlete the French Constitutional Court and ultimately accepted by the IOC will be President of the French Cour de subject to a rigorous additional out-of- Cassation) and the IOC EB. competition testing programme in The IOC EB reaffirms its serious coordination with the relevant IF and concerns about the obvious WADA. Any non-availability for this deficiencies in the fight against doping. programme will lead to the immediate The IOC thus emphasises again its call withdrawal of the accreditation by the to WADA to fully review their anti- IOC. doping system. The IOC will make its Beyond these decisions, the IOC EB contribution to this review by reaffirmed the provisional measures proposing measures for clearer already taken on 19 July 2016. They responsibilities, more transparency, remain in place until 31 December better supervision procedures and 2016, and will be reviewed by the EB in more independence. December 2016. * The IAAF has already established its Additional sanctions and measures eligibility pool with regard to Russian may be imposed by the IOC following athletes. the final report of the IP and due legal IOC SANCTIONS FOUR ATHLETES FOR FAILING ANTI-DOPING TESTS AT BEIJING 2008 AND LONDON 2012

Nurcan TAYLAN, 32, of , disqualified from the Olympic Games competing in the women’s 48kg Beijing 2008, in which she did not weightlifting event, has been finish. Reanalysis of Taylan’s samples

P a g e | 92 from Beijing 2008 resulted in a and to consider any further positive test for the prohibited action within its own substance stanozolol. competence. III. The Turkish Olympic The IOC Disciplinary Commission, Committee shall ensure full composed for this case of Denis implementation of this decision. Oswald (Chairman), Juan Antonio IV. This decision enters into force Samaranch and Gunilla Lindberg immediately. decided the following: Hripsime KHURSHUDYAN, 29, of Armenia, competing in the women’s I. The Athlete, Nurcan Taylan: 75kg weightlifting event, has been disqualified from the Olympic Games i. is found to have committed an Beijing 2008 in which she ranked 11th. anti-doping rule violation Reanalysis of Khurshudyan’s samples pursuant to the IOC Anti- from Beijing 2008 resulted in a Doping Rules applicable to the positive test for the prohibited Games of the XXIX Olympiad in substance stanozolol. Beijing in 2008 (presence and/or use, of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or The IOC Disciplinary Commission, Markers in an athlete’s bodily composed for this case of Denis specimen), Oswald (Chairman), Juan Antonio ii. is disqualified from all the Samaranch and Ugur Erdener, decided events in which she participated the following: upon the occasion of the Olympic Games Beijing 2008, I. The Athlete, Hripsime namely, the 48kg weightlifting Khurshudyan: event. i. is found to have committed an II. The IWF is requested to modify anti-doping rule violation the results of the above- pursuant to the IOC Anti- mentioned events accordingly Doping Rules applicable to the

P a g e | 93

Games of the XXIX Olympiad in dehydrochlormethyltestosterone Beijing in 2008 (presence (turinabol). and/or use, of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or The IOC Disciplinary Commission, Markers in an athlete’s bodily composed for this case of Denis specimen), Oswald (Chairman), Juan Antonio ii. is disqualified from all the Samaranch and Ugur Erdener, decided events in which she participated the following: upon the occasion of the Olympic Games Beijing 2008, I. The Athlete, Pavel Kryvitski: namely, the 75kg weightlifting event. i. is found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation II. The IWF is requested to modify pursuant to the IOC Anti- the results of the above- Doping Rules applicable to the mentioned event accordingly Games of the XXX Olympiad in and to consider any further London in 2012 (presence, action within its own and/or use, of Prohibited competence. Substances or their Metabolites III. The National Olympic or Markers in an athlete’s bodily Committee of Armenia shall specimen), ensure full implementation of ii. is disqualified from the event in this decision. which he participated upon the occasion of the Olympic Games Pavel KRYVITKSI, 32, of London 2012, namely the competing in athletics (hammer throw hammer throw event, in which event), has been disqualified from the he ranked 28th. Olympic Games London 2012 in which he ranked 28th. Reanalysis of II. The IAAF is requested to modify Kryvitski’s samples from London 2012 the results of the above- resulted in a positive test for the mentioned event accordingly prohibited substances stanozolol and and to consider any further

P a g e | 94

action within its own pursuant to the IOC Anti- competence. Doping Rules applicable to the III. The National Olympic Games of the XXX Olympiad in Committee of the Republic of London in 2012 (presence, Belarus shall ensure full and/or use, of a Prohibited implementation of this decision. Substance or its Metabolites or IV. This decision enters into force Markers in an athlete’s bodily immediately. specimen), ii. is disqualified from the event in Oleksandr P'YATNYTSYA, 31, of which he participated upon the , competing in athletics, has occasion of the Olympic Games been disqualified from the Olympic London 2012, namely the Games London 2012 and ordered to javelin throw event, in which he return the silver medal from the javelin placed 2nd and for which he throw event. Reanalysis of was awarded the silver medal. P'yatnytsya's samples from London iii. has the silver medal, the 2012 resulted in a positive test for the medallist pin, and the diploma prohibited substance obtained in the javelin throw dehydrochlormethyltestosterone event withdrawn and is ordered (turinabol). to return same.

The IOC Disciplinary Commission, II. The IAAF is requested to modify composed for this case of Denis the results of the above- Oswald (Chairman), Juan Antonio mentioned event accordingly Samaranch and Ugur Erdener, decided and to consider any further the following: action within its own competence. III. The National Olympic I. The Athlete, Oleksandr Committee of Ukraine shall P'yatnytsya: ensure full implementation of i. is found to have committed an this decision. anti-doping rule violation

P a g e | 95

IV. The National Olympic The additional analyses on samples Committee of Ukraine shall collected during the Olympic Games notably secure the return to the Beijing 2008 and London 2012 were IOC, as soon as possible, of the performed with improved analytical medal, the medallist pin and the methods, in order to possibly detect diploma awarded in connection prohibited substances that could not with the javelin throw event to be identified by the analysis performed the Athlete. at the time of these editions of the V. This decision enters into force Olympic Games. immediately.

CHANGES IN IOC EXECUTIVE BOARD WITH SEVEN NEW MEMBERS AND TWO NEW VICE PRESIDENTS

Juan Antonio Samaranch (ESP) and Commission, Angela Ruggiero, Uğur Erdener (TUR) will replace replaces outgoing Chair Claudia Bokel. outgoing Vice-Presidents Nawal El The newly composed EB will begin its Moutawakel (MAR) and Sir Craig work after the Olympic Games Rio Reedie (GBR). Five new and returning 2016. Members will also be joining the In a presentation by the Chair of the Executive Board: Gian Franco Kasper IOC Members Election Commission, (SUI), Angela Ruggiero (USA), Sergey HRH the Princess Royal, it was Bubka (UKR), Ser Miang Ng (SIN), reported that the Commission has and Willi Kaltschmitt (GUA). Ching- devised a new procedure for the Kuo Wu and Patrick Hickey are recruitment of IOC Members based on resuming their seats as representatives the Olympic Agenda 2020 of the Association of Summer Olympic recommendations. The new approach International Federations (ASOIF) and aims at targeting new members with the Association of National Olympic the skills and experience needed by the Committees (ANOC) respectively. The IOC, and includes integrity checks by new Chair of the IOC Athletes’ the IOC Ethics Commission.

P a g e | 96

Following a proposal from the Sergey Bubka (UKR), and Uğur Executive Board, eight new IOC Erdener (TUR). Members were elected at the 129th IOC Session ahead of the Olympic The addition of the new Members Games Rio 2016: Nita brings the total number of IOC Ambani (IND); Sari Essayah (FIN); Ivo Members to 98. More proposals are Ferriani (ITA); Luis due for the IOC Session in Lima in Moreno(COL); Auvita 2017 after elections in certain Rapilla (PNG); Anant International Summer Sports Singh (RSA); Tricia Smith (CAN); Federations and National Olympic and Karl Stoss (AUT). Committees (NOCs) following the Olympic Games Rio 2016, in The newly-elected Members represent consultation with the respective a cross-section of expertise from the stakeholders. worlds of sport, culture, medicine, sociology, business, law and management. Gender equality is guaranteed with four women and four men on the list.

Seventeen Members were re-elected en bloc: Anita DeFrantz (USA), HRH The Princess Royal (GBR), Richard Carrión (PUR), Nat Indrapana (THA), Denis Oswald (SUI), IOC President Thomas Bach (GER), Mario Pescante (ITA), Gerhard Heiberg (NOR), Robin Mitchell (FIJ), Alex GILADY (ISR), Sam Ramsamy (RSA), Ung Chang (PRK), Guy Drut (FRA), Samih Moudallal (SYR), Zaiqing Yu (CHN),

P a g e | 97

#13 ANTI DOPING UPDATES

Image Courtesy : shawnews.files

WADA ATHLETE COMMITTEE STATEMENT ON IPC DECISION

The WADA Athletes’ Committee, important and encouraging message to together with clean athletes from all the clean athletes of the world. sports across the globe, commends and We are heartened to see that the facts supports today’s decision by the as presented by the McLaren Report International Paralympic Committee were given due and thorough (IPC) to suspend the Russian consideration, and that a principled Paralympic Committee. The IPC’s decision was made as a result. We decision to uphold “morals over extend our congratulations to the IPC medals” and stand behind the values of for upholding the rights of the majority clean, fair, doping-free sport sends an of clean athletes world-wide, and

P a g e | 98 maintaining integrity in sport as a guiding principle.

WADA REMOVES KENYA FROM THE WORLD ANTI- DOPING CODE’S NON-COMPLIANT LIST

Following a circular vote of its drafted and adopted anti-doping Foundation Board members, the legislation now deemed to be in line World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) with the Code. wishes to announce that it has As stipulated in Article 23.5.5 of the removed the Anti-Doping Agency of Code, WADA will report the Kenya (ADAK) from the list of declarations of non-compliance to the signatories previously deemed non- Sports Movement and the United compliant with the 2015 World Anti- Nations Educational, Scientific and Doping Code (the Code). Kenya has Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

WADA STATEMENT CLARIFIES TIMING OF MCLAREN INVESTIGATION REPORT AND STATES FACTS RELATED TO INVESTIGATIONS INTO RUSSIAN MATTERS

The World Anti-Doping Agency manipulation of the doping control (WADA) has taken note of the views process; and, the Agency’s expressed by some concerning the subsequent recommendations -- both timing of publication of the Agency’s that led to the International Olympic independent McLaren Investigation Committee’s (IOC) decision of 24 July. Report, which was published by WADA understands that the timing of Professor Richard H. McLaren on 18 the McLaren Investigation Report has July, exposing Russian State

P a g e | 99 been destabilizing for a number of leveraged all information that the organizations as they prepare for the whistleblowers had provided; and yet, Rio Olympic and Paralympic Games. there was no concrete evidence to However, WADA wishes to factually support State manipulation.” clarify that the Agency acted On 9 November 2015, the Pound immediately on allegations concerning Commission reported and exposed Russia when it had corroborated wide-spread doping in Russian evidence and the power to do so under athletics; and, on 10 November 2015, the World Anti-Doping Code (Code). WADA took quick and When German-based ARD released decisive action on the Commission’s their first documentary in December recommendations. 2014 that contained corroborated “It was only when CBS 60 Minutes and evidence, WADA quickly initiated its the New York Times, on 8 and 12 May Independent Commission. The 2016 respectively, published the Commission, which was chaired by allegations from the former director of Richard W. Pound, commenced its the Moscow and Sochi laboratories, investigation in January 2015 when Dr. Grigory Rodchenkov, that WADA WADA acquired its new powers of had concrete evidence suggesting investigation under the 2015 Code. Russian state involvement that could “While our Independent Commission’s be investigated by initiating the Report suggested that doping in Russia McLaren Investigation, which we did was likely not restricted to athletics, immediately,” said Craig Reedie, and that the Russian secret services WADA President. “This decision was (FSB) were present within the Sochi endorsed by WADA’s Executive and Moscow laboratories, the Committee and WADA’s Athlete Commission did not uncover concrete Committee,” he continued. “It must be evidence to the effect that the Russian understood that Dr. Rodchenkov was state was manipulating the doping heard several times by the Pound control process,” said Richard W. Commission in 2015; and that, he Pound. “The Pound Commission never provided the information that he

P a g e | 100 later revealed to the New York Times Federations,” said Olivier Niggli, in May 2016. This information was Director General, WADA. “It should be subsequently corroborated by the noted however that Professor McLaren Investigation, which also McLaren’s focus thus far was on unveiled a wider implication of the establishing involvement of the Moscow laboratory.” Russian State and not regarding individual athletes that may have “WADA’s Executive Committee – benefitted,” Niggli continued. “WADA composed in equal parts by will continue supporting anti-doping representatives of the Olympic organizations by providing Movement and Governments of the information as and when it becomes world – supported Professor available via McLaren’s ongoing McLaren’s independent mandate, Investigation.” which was to obtain evidence as quickly as possible in the interest of As it relates to WADA’s process of clean athletes,” said Reedie. “While it accreditation and proficiency testing of is destabilizing in the lead up to the anti-doping laboratories, it focuses on Games, it is obvious, given the the technical abilities of laboratories. seriousness of the revelations that he In the case of the Moscow laboratory, uncovered, that they had to be WADA suspended the laboratory in published and acted upon without 2015 as soon as breaches were delay.” identified via the Pound Commission. Addressing corruption within the anti- “Further to the International Olympic doping system – including state or Committee’s criteria being outlined on secret service interference in 24 July, WADA has facilitated the laboratory operations – will be one of transfer of relevant information that is the topics discussed during the first in available to date, concerning a series of multi-stakeholder Think individual athletes, from the McLaren Tanks that WADA will hold in Investigation team to International September 2016.

P a g e | 101

WADA ACKNOWLEDGES IOC DECISION ON RUSSIA, STANDS BY AGENCY’S EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

The World Anti-Doping Agency Committee recommendations that (WADA) acknowledges the decision by were based on the outcomes of the the International Olympic Committee’s McLaren Investigation and would have (IOC) Executive Board asking ensured a straight-forward, strong and International Federations to deal with harmonized approach,” said Sir Craig the selection of Russian athletes for Reedie, President, WADA. “The Rio 2016; and, stands by its Executive McLaren Report exposed, beyond a Committee's recommendations of 18 reasonable doubt, a state-run doping July. WADA’s Executive Committee program in Russia that seriously recommended that the IOC consider, undermines the principles of clean under its Charter, declining entries for sport embodied within the World Anti- Rio 2016 of all athletes submitted by Doping Code,” Reedie continued. the Russian Olympic Committee. “While WADA fully respects the IOC’s On 18 July, WADA’s Independent autonomy to make decisions under the McLaren Investigation exposed Olympic Charter, the approach taken Russian State manipulation of the and the criteria set forward will doping control process. The inevitably lead to a lack of Investigation’s Report corroborates harmonization, potential challenges allegations made by Dr. Grigory and lesser protection for clean Rodchenkov, the former director of the athletes,” said Olivier Niggli, Director WADA-accredited laboratory in General, WADA. Moscow, which were released by CBS As it relates to Yulia Stepanova, 60 Minutes and The New York “WADA has been very vocal in Times on 8 and 12 May respectively. supporting Yulia’s desire to compete as “WADA is disappointed that the IOC an independent athlete,” said did not heed WADA’s Executive Niggli. “Ms. Stepanova was

P a g e | 102 instrumental in courageously exposing WADA can also confirm that, since the single biggest doping scandal of all Professor McLaren published his time,” Niggli continued. “WADA is Report on 18 July, the Agency has very concerned by the message that facilitated the transfer of evidence this sends whistleblowers for the from the McLaren Investigation team future,” he said. to the International Paralympic Committee – which acts as an As it relates to the IOC’s repeated call International Federation for several to WADA that the Agency review the Paralympic sports and has authority anti-doping system, WADA is fully over the Paralympic Games – and the committed to further strengthening International Federations of Olympic the system that belongs to sports that are implicated in the stakeholders worldwide. As a first Report. Specifically, for follow up as a measure, WADA has already matter of urgency, the Agency announced that it will be holding the transferred names and relevant details first in a series of multi-stakeholder related to athletes under their Think Tanks in September focused, in authority, which escaped sanctions due particular, on: minimising corruption to the ‘Disappearing Positive’ and bribery practices in the anti- methodology described in the Report; doping process; implementing and, that may be entered to compete at consequences of non-compliance; and, Rio 2016. reviewing WADA’s governance structure. This process will concentrate On 18 July, Professor McLaren on discussing responsibilities, confirmed that: transparency and the independence of 1. he had gathered and reviewed as WADA, which is a key matter that much evidence as was possible within must be discussed by Government and the limited 57-day time frame that he Sport. WADA remains committed to had to deliver his Report; protecting the clean athlete, with integrity and within the limits of its 2. his Report was ‘partial’; investigation powers and financial 3. per his Terms of Reference, there was resources. more evidence to be reviewed ‘to

P a g e | 103

identify athletes that might have WADA notes the IOC’s specific benefited from manipulation of the reference to an International Shooting doping control process to conceal Sport Federation (ISSF) letter of 23 positive doping tests; and July. The Agency can confirm that the issue has been addressed directly with 4. that he would be pleased to complete the ISSF and that there was no mistake his mandate. or discrepancy in the McLaren Report WADA is pleased to confirm that the in relation to the samples Agency has extended Professor referenced. The inclusion of shooting McLaren's mandate so that he can samples in the Report reflects the fact finish the work he has started. WADA that three samples were in the will ensure to act upon, and provide McLaren database, showing that they anti-doping organizations with any were part of the state-run mechanism further information that may become but were not provided with cover up available as part of the McLaren protection. Investigation’s work.

WADA SATISFIED BY CAS DECISIONS CONCERNING THE RUSSIAN OLYMPIC COMMITTEE AND 68 RUSSIAN ATHLETES

The World Anti-Doping Agency (IAAF). The CAS has dismissed both (WADA) is satisfied with the decisions the request for arbitration filed by the delivered today by the Court of ROC and 68 Claimant Athletes; and, Arbitration for Sport (CAS) concerning the appeal filed by 67 of the same the arbitrations between the Russian athletes against the IAAF decision to Olympic Committee (ROC), a number consider them as ineligible for the Rio of Russian athletes (the Claimant 2016 Olympic Games. Athletes) and the International WADA has supported the Association of Athletics Federations International Association of Athletics

P a g e | 104

Federation (IAAF) requiring its member National Council decision taken on 17 June to Federation, ARAF, to live up to the maintain its suspension of the All- IAAF’s World Anti-Doping Code Russian Athletics Federation compliant rules by enforcing them (ARAF). The suspension was first effectively in their jurisdiction,” he imposed by the IAAF on 13 November continued. “This is vital to ensure that 2015 further to the findings of WADA’s all athletes are competing on a level Independent Commission into playing-field.” widespread doping in Russian As such, it is now up to other Athletics. Under IAAF Rules, Russian International Federations to consider track and field athletes are ineligible to their responsibilities under the World compete in international competitions, Anti-Doping Code as it relates to their including Rio 2016, unless they satisfy Russian National Federations; and, up specific criteria. to the International Olympic “WADA firmly believes that this is not Committee, in accordance with its about punishing some athletes for the media release of 19 July, to consider its actions of others,” said Craig Reedie, responsibilities under the Olympic WADA President. “It is about the IAAF Charter.

WADA REINSTATES RIO LABORATORY ACCREDITATION IN TIME FOR THE RIO GAMES

The World Anti-Doping Agency Doping Control Laboratory (WADA) announces that, in (Laboratório Brasileiro de Controle de accordance with the International Dopagem – LBCD – LADETEC / IQ – Standard for Laboratories (ISL), Sir UFRJ) [Rio Laboratory] in Rio de Craig Reedie, Chairman of WADA’s Janeiro, Brazil. This reinstatement Executive Committee, has approved allows the Rio Laboratory to resume lifting the provisional suspension of anti-doping analysis on urine and the accreditation of the Brazilian blood samples with immediate effect.

P a g e | 105

The Rio Laboratory, which had its 20 July, the Disciplinary Committee accreditation suspended on 24 June, issued its recommendation to the due to a non-conformity with the ISL, Chairman of the Executive Committee has successfully complied with the with respect to accreditation status. ISL’s requirements for reinstatement After reviewing the recommendation, and no further suspension is required. and the reports from WADA’s Laboratory Expert Group, the “WADA is very pleased to announce Chairman approved lifting the that the Rio Laboratory’s accreditation provisional suspension. has been reinstated,” said Olivier Niggli, Director General, WADA. “All Pursuant to the ISL, WADA is parties worked diligently to resolve the responsible for accrediting and re- identified issue so that the Laboratory accrediting anti-doping laboratories; could be up and running optimally for thereby, ensuring that they maintain the Rio Olympic and Paralympic the highest quality Games that start on 5 August,” Niggli standards. Whenever a laboratory does continued. “Athletes can be confident not meet ISL requirements, WADA that anti-doping sample analysis has may decide to suspend or revoke the been robust throughout the laboratory’s accreditation. Laboratory’s suspension; and, that it As stipulated within the ISL, this will also be during the Games.” decision is communicated to all After the Rio Laboratory’s relevant national public authorities; accreditation was provisionally national accreditation bodies; National suspended, a Disciplinary Committee Anti-Doping Organizations; National was formed to review the case on the Olympic Committees; International basis of the Procedural Rules adopted Federations and the International by WADA’s Executive Committee. On Olympic Committee.

WADA ATHLETE COMMITTEE STATEMENT ON THE MCLAREN REPORT

P a g e | 106

The findings of the McLaren Report the time for sporting organizations to are truly shocking. We as a Committee stand up against doping and affirm in are deeply upset to read of the the most robust ways possible their unprecedented levels of doping and commitment to protecting clean subversion that have taken place in athletes and zero tolerance. Russia.

This is an investigation that clean athletes and our Committee have been publicly calling for since last year. Although we have known of the allegations, to read the report today, to see the weight of the evidence, and to see the scale of doping and deception is astounding.

We fully support the recommendations put forward today by WADA to the international sporting community, and sincerely hope that technicalities are not used to circumvent these appropriate sanctions. We would like to highlight our belief that WADA must allow Professor McLaren and his team to continue their investigation, that Russia should be banned from the Rio Olympics, Paralympics, and other international events, and that International Federations must enact sanctions so as to protect clean sport.

All athletes have a right to clean sport and a right to compete clean. Now is

P a g e | 107

#14 RIO OLYMPICS : ATHLETES’ COMMISSION UPDATES

Image Courtesy:stillmed.olympic.org

Reflecting the Olympic Agenda 2020 The mission of the Commission is to goal of placing the athletes at the heart ensure that the athletes' viewpoint of the Olympic Movement and remains at the heart of the Olympic strengthening the support to athletes, Movement decisions. To that effect, the Athletes’ Commission serves as a the Commission is invited by the IOC link between athletes and the IOC. The President to submit proposals, Athletes’ Commission advises the IOC recommendations and/or reports to Session, the IOC Executive Board (EB) the IOC Executive Board or the IOC and the IOC President on matters Session. In a next step, the concerning athletes. Commission develops toolkits, guidelines and projects to support athletes on and off the field of play.

P a g e | 108

The Commission members have representation all relevant IOC iii. Develop recommendations for commissions, including the IOC other IOC Commissions, such as Executive Board, subject to the Women in Sport, Sustainability and applicable rules of the Olympic Legacy, Sport and Active Society Charter. - Within the Olympic Movement: The responsibilities of the Athletes'

Commission are to: i. Lead the Athletes' Engagement Strategy to liaise, communicate and Partner, liaise and lead the engage with athletes worldwide. This Athletes’ Commissions from includes developing the Olympic across the Olympic Movement Athletes' Hub, and being present at the Olympic Games and Youth Olympic - Within the IOC Games to interact with athletes, as well as liaising with relevant IOC Recognised Organisations such as i. Bring together athletes International Federations, WADA, the representatives from around the world IPC, WOA, ANOC, Continental every two years through the Associations, CAS and others; International Athletes Forum;

ii. Act as role models to promote the ii. Represent athletes throughout the Olympic values and history among the Olympic Movement and give input on youth of the world and the wider activities related to the population implementation of Olympic Agenda 2020, specifically focusing on protecting and supporting clean iii. Encourage and support the athletes, both on and off the field of development of IF and NOC Athletes play; Commissions throughout the world, in

P a g e | 109 line with Olympic Agenda 2020 edition of the Games (through the recommendations. Coordination Commissions);

Represent athletes in the Olympic Movement: 2. Take part in the evaluation of the Olympic sports programme; - On the field of play - Off the field of play i. Protect clean athletes: Representing the athletes on the WADA Executive i. Holistic development of athletes Committee and Foundation Board (including education, etc.) ii. At the Olympic Games: ii. Career transition: Develop and take 1. Take part in the evaluation of the part in the of the IOC Athlete candidate cities seeking to host the Career Programme (ACP) and the Olympic and Youth Olympic Games Athlete Learning Gateway (ALG); (through the Evaluation Commissions) and monitor the organisation of each The Athletes’ Commission is supported by the IOC Sports Department.

ELECTION COMMITTEE IS ANNOUNCED AS VOTES OPEN IN THREE DAYS FOR FOUR SPOTS ON THE IOC ATHLETES’ COMMISSION

With 23 Olympians in the running, the the entrance of the dining hall in the Election Committee will be responsible Olympic Village, in addition to the for ensuring that the procedures and hotels of the five football cities. regulations are followed at all times as well as certifying the final vote count. The Committee is composed of the Voting will take place from 24 July to following individuals: Nicole Hoevertsz 17 August at the IOC Space, located at (Chair of the IOC Election Committee

P a g e | 110 and representing the IOC Legal Affairs withdrawn her candidature. The Commission); Guy Canivet results will be announced on 18 August (representing the IOC Ethics in the Olympic Village. After approval Commission); James Tomkins by the IOC Session, the four elected (representing the IOC Athletes’ athletes will become IOC Members for Commission); Dagmawit Girmay an eight-year term of office. Berhane (representing the IOC Members Election Commission); José As reaffirmed in Olympic Agenda Perurena (representing the Association 2020, the IOC is committed to placing of Summer Olympic International athletes at the heart of the Olympic Federations (ASOIF)); and Mikaela Movement and strengthening support Cojuangco Jaworski (representing to clean athletes on and off the field of ANOC). play. The IOC Athletes’ Commission and its upcoming elections at the Four seats on the IOC Athletes’ Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro play Commission will become available an important and unique role in this with current members Claudia Bokel, regard. Dae Sung Moon, Alexander Popov and Yumilka Ruiz Luaces finishing their Created in 1981, the IOC Athletes' terms of office this summer. All Commission is the link between athletes participating in the Olympic Olympic athletes and the IOC and Games Rio 2016 will be eligible to vote. serves as the athletes' voice within the They will be asked to elect four Olympic Movement. Since 1996, the candidates from four different sports majority of the Commission’s members to ensure a varied representation from have been elected by their peers during the Olympic sports programme. an edition of the Olympic Games. Members of the Athletes’ Commission While 24 candidates were approved by are involved in the IOC’s main the IOC Executive Board last commissions and working groups. The December, Alessandra Sensini, Chair of the Athletes’ Commission, a candidate from Italy, has since position currently held by Claudia

P a g e | 111

Bokel, serves as a Member of the IOC the athletes’ interests at the highest Executive Board and thus represents level.