The Russian Doping Scandal at the Court of Arbitration for Sport: Lessons for the World Anti-Doping System
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) The Russian doping scandal at the court of arbitration for sport: lessons for the world anti-doping system Duval, A. DOI 10.1007/s40318-017-0107-6 Publication date 2017 Document Version Final published version Published in The International Sports Law Journal License CC BY Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Duval, A. (2017). The Russian doping scandal at the court of arbitration for sport: lessons for the world anti-doping system. The International Sports Law Journal, 16(3-4), 177–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40318-017-0107-6 General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:01 Oct 2021 Int Sports Law J (2017) 16:177–197 DOI 10.1007/s40318-017-0107-6 ARTICLE The Russian doping scandal at the court of arbitration for sport: lessons for the world anti-doping system Antoine Duval1 Published online: 22 March 2017 Ó The Author(s) 2017. This article is an open access publication Abstract The Russian doping scandal that rocked the 1 Introduction sporting world during the past 2 years is far from over. The World Anti-Doping Agency is still in turmoil over its total The Russian doping scandal that rocked the sporting world failure to discover the Russian doping scheme and the during the past 2 years is far from over. The World Anti- International Olympic Committee and other Sports Doping Agency (WADA) is still in turmoil over its failure to Governing Bodies are still struggling to find the appropri- discover the Russian doping scheme and the International ate response to Russia’s total disregard of the spirit and Olympic Committee (IOC) and other Sports Governing letter of the World Anti-Doping Code. Yet the recent Bodies (SGBs) are still struggling to find the appropriate publications of a string of awards related to the scandal by response to Russia’s disregard of the spirit and letter of the the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) provides us with World Anti-Doping Code (WADC). Yet the recent publi- the opportunity to offer some preliminary reflections on the cations of a string of awards related to the scandal by the role of the CAS in dealing with the consequences of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) provide us with the scandal for the world anti-doping system at large. This opportunity to offer some preliminary reflections on the role article will analyse the relevant CAS awards in a chrono- of the CAS in dealing with the consequences of the scandal logical order. It will start with the ‘IAAF Award’, before for the world anti-doping system at large. turning to the awards rendered by the CAS ad hoc Division Since December 2014, and the broadcasting of an in Rio, and finishing with the ‘IPC award’. The modest alarming documentary by the German public broadcaster,1 ambition of this paper is to retrace the reasoning used by much happened. The documentary triggered the Pound the CAS panels and to analyse its broader consequences for investigation financed by the WADA,2 which led to two the practical operation of the world anti-doping system. damaging reports for the Russian anti-doping system and the International Association of Athletics Federations Keywords Doping Á World Anti-Doping Agency Á World (IAAF).3 Yet, this was only the beginning. Shortly after, Anti-Doping Code Á Court of Arbitration for Sport Á the former head of Moscow’s anti-doping laboratory Olympics Á Sports Law Á International Arbitration 1 H. Seppelt, The secrets of doping: How Russia makes winners, ARD, Youtube, 27 April 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= iu9B-ty9JCY. Accessed 25 January 2017. 2 WADA announces details of independent commission, WADA Press release, 16 December 2014. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/ media/news/2014-12/wada-announces-details-of-independent-com mission. Accessed 25 January 2017. & Antoine Duval 3 WADA Independent Commission Report #1, 9 November 2015. [email protected] https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/world-anti-doping-program/ independent-commission-report-1. Accessed 25 January 2017, and 1 International and European Sports Law, T.M.C. Asser WADA Independent Commission Report #2, 14 January 2016. Institute, R.J. Schimmelpennincklaan 20-22, https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/world-anti-doping-program/ 2517 JN The Hague, The Netherlands independent-commission-report-2. Accessed 25 January 2017. 123 178 Int Sports Law J (2017) 16:177–197 provided a detailed sketch to the New York Times of the decided not to decide on 24 July 2016 and, instead, granted operation of a general state-led doping scheme in Russia.4 to the International Federations (IFs) the competence to The system was designed to avert any positive doping tests determine whether each Russian athlete put forward by the for top-level Russian sportspeople and was going far Russian Olympic Committee (ROC) to participate in the beyond athletics. These allegations were later largely Olympics meets a limited set of conditions.8 Moreover, the confirmed and reinforced by the McLaren investigation ROC was also barred from entering athletes who were initiated by WADA in May 2016,5 and which led to the sanctioned for doping in the past, even if they have already publication of a first report in July 2016 shortly before the served their doping sanction. In the end, a majority of the Rio Olympics.6 The second and final report of the McLaren Russian athletes (278 out of 389 submitted by the ROC9) investigation was released in December 2016.7 Based on cleared the IOC’s bar relatively easily. However, this also this influx of information and investigations, the facts are meant that a considerable number of Russian athletes (111) relatively straightforward: the Russian state organized a did not fulfil the IOC’s conditions, leading many of them to fail-proof system to protect ‘its’ athletes from failing anti- fight for their right to compete at the Rio Olympics before doping tests. Thus, as the IOC’s litany of retroactive the CAS ad hoc Division.10 decisions sanctioning Russian Olympic medallists for past Finally, on 22 July, the IPC decided to open suspension anti-doping violations demonstrate, it secured the success proceedings against the National Paralympic Committee of of its athletes in recent Olympiads. The revelation of such a Russia (NPC Russia) in light of its apparent inability to sophisticated state-led system to circumvent the world anti- fulfil its IPC membership responsibilities and obligations.11 doping system could not be left unsanctioned. Otherwise, A few weeks later, on 7 August, the IPC Governing Board the WADC would be deprived of the little efficacy it had decided to suspend the Russian Paralympic Committee left. Hence, the IAAF, first, and subsequently the IOC with immediate effect.12 Consequently, the Russian Para- (even though in an indirect fashion as will be explained in lympic Committee lost all rights and privileges of IPC section II) and the International Paralympic Committee membership. Specifically, it was not entitled to enter ath- (IPC) issued sanctions against their Russian members and, letes in competitions sanctioned by the IPC, and/or to thus, indirectly also against Russian athletes. participate in IPC activities. This was an obvious blow to The IAAF quickly suspended the Russian Athletics Russia’s Paralympic team and, as was to be expected, the Federation in November 2015 and declared its athletes RPC decided to challenge the decision at the CAS. ineligible for IAAF competitions. This controversial deci- Thereafter, the CAS became the central legal playing field sion was later confirmed in June 2016 before the Rio where the cases involving decisions of the SGBs due to the Olympics, and barred Russian athletes access to the Russian doping scandal were challenged and fought on.13 Olympic Games. The IAAF did, however, foresee a narrow Henceforth, it also had the future shape of the world anti- exception for Russian athletes able to show that they were doping system in its hands. Would it favour the right of properly tested outside of Russia. Nonetheless, the athletes using this exception were to compete under a neutral flag at 8 Decision of the IOC Executive Board Concerning the Participation the Olympics. Unsurprisingly, Russian athletes led by pole of Russian Athletes in the Olympic Games Rio 2016, IOC Press superstar (and now IOC member), Yelena Isinbayeva, and Release, 24 July 2016. https://www.olympic.org/news/decision-of- the Russian Olympic Committee decided to challenge this the-ioc-executive-board-concerning-the-participation-of-russian-ath decision in front of the CAS. Unlike the IAAF, the IOC’s letes-in-the-olympic-games-rio-2016. Accessed 25 January 2017. 9 See Wikipedia, Russia at the 2016 Summer Olympics. https://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_at_the_2016_Summer_Olympics. Acces- 4 Rebecca R.