Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Yearbook of International Sports Arbitration 2016 pp 61–100Cite as

The Russian Doping Scandal at the Court of Arbitration for Sport: Lessons for the World Anti-Doping System

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 647 Accesses

Part of the book series: Yearbook of International Sports Arbitration ((YISA))

Abstract

The Russian doping scandal that rocked the sporting world during the past two years is far from over. The WADA is still in turmoil over its total failure to discover the Russian doping scheme and the IOC and other SGBs are still struggling to find the appropriate response to Russia’s total disregard of the spirit and letter of the WADA Code. Yet the recent publications of a string of awards related to the scandal by the CAS provides us with the opportunity to offer some preliminary reflections on the role of the CAS in dealing with the consequences of the scandal for the world anti-doping system at large. This article will analyse the relevant CAS awards in a chronological order. It will start with the ‘IAAF Award’, before turning to the awards rendered by the CAS ad hoc Division in Rio, and finishing with the ‘IPC award’. The modest ambition of this paper is to retrace the reasoning used by the CAS panels and to analyse its broader consequences for the practical operation of the world anti-doping system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 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. 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-commission. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  3. 3.

    WADA Independent Commission Report #1, 9 November 2015. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/world-anti-doping-program/independent-commission-report-1. Accessed 25 January 2017, and WADA Independent Commission Report #2, 14 January 2016. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/world-anti-doping-program/independent-commission-report-2. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  4. 4.

    Rebecca R. Ruiz and Michael Schwirtz, Russian Insider Says State-Run Doping Fueled Olympic Gold, New York Times, 12 May 2016. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/13/sports/russia-doping-sochi-olympics-2014.html. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  5. 5.

    WADA publishes Terms of Reference for Independent Person heading Sochi Investigation, WADA Press Release, 20 May 2016. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2016-05/wada-publishes-terms-of-reference-for-independent-person-heading-sochi. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  6. 6.

    McLaren Independent Investigation Report—Part I, 18 July 2016. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/doping-control-process/mclaren-independent-investigation-report-into-sochi-allegations. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  7. 7.

    McLaren Independent Investigation Report—Part II, 9 December 2016. https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/mclaren_report_part_ii_2.pdf. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  8. 8.

    Decision of the IOC Executive Board Concerning the Participation of Russian Athletes in the Olympic Games Rio 2016, IOC Press Release, 24 July 2016. https://www.olympic.org/news/decision-of-the-ioc-executive-board-concerning-the-participation-of-russian-athletes-in-the-olympic-games-rio-2016. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  9. 9.

    See Wikipedia, Russia at the 2016 Summer Olympics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_at_the_2016_Summer_Olympics. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  10. 10.

    In general on the role of the CAS Ad Hoc Division in Olympic selection dispute, see Duval 2016a, pp. 52–66.

  11. 11.

    The IPC opens suspension proceedings against NPC Russia, IPC Press Release, 22 July 2016. https://www.paralympic.org/news/ipc-opens-suspension-proceedings-against-npc-russia. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  12. 12.

    The IPC suspends the Russian Paralympic Committee with immediate effect, IPC Press Release, 7 August 2016. https://www.paralympic.org/news/ipc-suspends-russian-paralympic-committee-immediate-effect. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  13. 13.

    Additionally to the cases reviewed here, the CAS also deals with cases involving specific individuals, such as the former head of the Russian federation, Valentin Balakhnichev, and the son of the former head of the IAAF, Papa Massata Diack. At the time of writing, it had not yet rendered its awards.

  14. 14.

    CAS 2016/O/4684, The Russian Olympic Committee (“ROC”) et al. v. The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF), Award of 21 July 2016.

  15. 15.

    The following awards are reviewed: CAS OG 16/13, Anastasia Karabelshikova & Ivan Podshivalov v. FISA & IOC, Award of 4 August 2016; CAS OG 16/04, Yulia Efimova v. ROC, IOC & FINA, Award of 4 August 2016; CAS OG 16/09, RWF v. IWF, Award of 3 August 2016; CAS OG 16/11, Daniil Andrienko et al. v. FISA & IOC, Award of 2 August 2016; CAS OG 16/18, Kiril Sveshnikov et al. v. UCI & IOC, Award of 5 August 2016; CAS OG 16/19, Natalia Podolskaya & Alexander Dyachenko v. ICF, Award of 7 August 2016; CAS OG 16/12, Ivan Balandin v. FISA & IOC, Award of 4 August 2016; CAS OG 16/21, Elena Anyushina & Alexey Korovashkov v. ICF & RCF, Award of 7 August 2016; CAS OG 16/24, Darya Klishina v. IAAF, Award of 15 August 2016.

  16. 16.

    CAS 2016/A/4745, Russian Paralympic Committee v. International Paralympic Committee, award of 23 August 2016.

  17. 17.

    IAAF Statement—WADA’s Independent Commission Report, IAAF Press Release, 9 November 2015. https://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/statement-wada-independent-commission-report. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  18. 18.

    IAAF Provisionally Suspends Russian Member Federation ARAF, IAAF Press Release, 13 November 2015. https://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/iaaf-araf-suspended. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  19. 19.

    ARAF Accepts Full suspension—IAAF Council Meeting, Monaco, IAAF Press Release, 26 November 2015. https://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/araf-accepts-full-suspension. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  20. 20.

    ARAF Reinstatement Conditions and Verification Criteria, IAAF Press Release, 11 December 2015. https://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/araf-reinstatement-verification-criteria. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  21. 21.

    Council Focuses on IAAF Reform and Russian Verification—IAAF Council Meeting, Day 2, IAAF Press Release, 11 March 2016. https://www.iaaf.org/news/iaaf-news/council-meeting-2016-reforms-russia. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  22. 22.

    ‘RusAF Has Not Met Reinstatement Conditions’—IAAF Council Meeting, Vienna, IAAF Press Release, 17 June 2016. https://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/iaaf-council-meeting-vienna. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  23. 23.

    Rule 22.1A IAAF Competition Rules reads as follows:

    1A. Notwithstanding Rule 22.1(a), upon application, the Council (or its delegate(s)) may exceptionally grant eligibility for some or all International Competitions, under conditions defined by the Council (or its delegate(s)), to an athlete whose National Federation is currently suspended by the IAAF, if (and only if) the athlete is able to demonstrate to the comfortable satisfaction of the Council that:

    (a) the suspension of the National Federation was not due in any way to its failure to protect and promote clean athletes, fair play, and the integrity and authenticity of the sport; or

    (b) if the suspension of the National Federation was due in any way to its failure to put in place adequate systems to protect and promote clean athletes, fair play, and the integrity and authenticity of the sport, (i) that failure does not affect or taint the athlete in any way, because he was subject to other, fully adequate, systems outside of the country of the National Federation for a sufficiently long period to provide substantial objective assurance of integrity; and (ii) in particular the athlete has for such period been subject to fully compliant drug-testing in- and out-of-competition equivalent in quality to the testing to which his competitors in the International Competition(s) in question are subject; or

    (c) that the athlete has made a truly exceptional contribution to the protection and promotion of clean athletes, fair play, and the integrity and authenticity of the sport.

    The more important the International Competition in question, the more corroborating evidence the athlete must provide in order to be granted special eligibility under this Rule 22.1A. Where such eligibility is granted, the athlete shall not represent the suspended National Federation in the International Competition(s) in question, but rather shall compete in an individual capacity, as a ‘Neutral Athlete’.

  24. 24.

    Guidelines for applications under Competition Rule 22.1A, 23 June 2016. http://www.iaaf.org/download/download?filename=123611d5-208d-45b3-a34e-69d02554b44f.pdf&urlSlug=guidelines-for-applications-under-competition. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  25. 25.

    Stepanova Eligible to Compete Internationally as an Independent Neutral Athlete, IAAF Press Release, 1 July 2016. https://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/independent-neutral-athlete. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  26. 26.

    Darya Klishina eligible to compete internationally as an independent neutral athlete, IAAF Press release, 9 July 2016. https://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/darya-klishina-eligible-independent-neutral-r. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  27. 27.

    IAAF Response to McLaren Report, IAAF Press Release, 18 July 2016. https://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/iaaf-response-mclaren-report. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  28. 28.

    IAAF President Sebastian Coe Attends CAS Hearings, IAAF Press Release, 19 July 2016. https://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/sebastian-coe-cas-hearing-rusaf. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  29. 29.

    The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) Rejects the Claims/Appeal of the Russian Olympic Committee (ROC) and of 68 Russian Athletes, 21 July 2016. http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Media_Release_4684_210716.pdf. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  30. 30.

    Rule 22.1(a) IAAF Competition rules.

  31. 31.

    CAS 2016/O/4684, The Russian Olympic Committee (“ROC”) et al. v. The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF), Award of 21 July 2016, para 115.

  32. 32.

    Ibid., para 117.

  33. 33.

    Ibid., para 118.

  34. 34.

    Ibid.

  35. 35.

    Ibid., para 119.

  36. 36.

    Ibid.

  37. 37.

    Ibid., para 120.

  38. 38.

    Ibid., para 121.

  39. 39.

    Ibid.

  40. 40.

    CAS 2011/O/2422, United States Olympic Committee (USOC) v. International Olympic Committee (IOC), Award of 4 October 2011.

  41. 41.

    CAS 2016/O/4684, The Russian Olympic Committee (“ROC”) et al. v. The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF), Award of 21 July 2016, paras 122–124.

  42. 42.

    Ibid., para 124.

  43. 43.

    Ibid.

  44. 44.

    Ibid., paras 125–127.

  45. 45.

    Ibid., para 126.

  46. 46.

    Ibid., para 127.

  47. 47.

    Ibid., para 128.

  48. 48.

    Ibid., para 129.

  49. 49.

    Ibid., para 131.

  50. 50.

    Ibid.

  51. 51.

    Ibid.

  52. 52.

    Ibid.

  53. 53.

    Ibid., para 132.

  54. 54.

    Ibid.

  55. 55.

    Ibid., para 136.

  56. 56.

    Ibid., para 137.

  57. 57.

    Ibid.

  58. 58.

    Ibid., para 138.

  59. 59.

    Ibid., para 140.

  60. 60.

    Ibid., para 151.

  61. 61.

    Ibid., para 152.

  62. 62.

    Ibid., para 143.

  63. 63.

    Ibid., para 146.

  64. 64.

    Ibid., paras 146 and 147.

  65. 65.

    Ibid., para 147.

  66. 66.

    Ibid., para 155.

  67. 67.

    Ibid., para 157.

  68. 68.

    Ibid.

  69. 69.

    Ibid., para 158.

  70. 70.

    Ibid., para 159.

  71. 71.

    Ibid., para 161.

  72. 72.

    Bye-law 5 to Rule 44 reads as follows: “Should there be no national federation for a particular sport in a country which has a recognised NOC, the latter may enter competitors individually in such sport in the Olympic Games subject to the approval of the IOC Executive Board and the IF governing such sport”.

  73. 73.

    CAS 2016/O/4684, The Russian Olympic Committee (“ROC”) et al. v. The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF), Award of 21 July 2016, para 164.

  74. 74.

    Ibid., para 165.

  75. 75.

    Ibid., para 167.

  76. 76.

    Ibid., para 168.

  77. 77.

    Ibid., para 170.

  78. 78.

    Ibid.

  79. 79.

    Ibid.

  80. 80.

    On the first years of the CAS Ad Hoc Division, see Kaufmann-Kohler 2001.

  81. 81.

    For the detailed references, see above footnote 15.

  82. 82.

    Decision of the IOC Executive Board concerning the participation of Russian Athletes in the Olympic Games Rio 2016, IOC Decision of 24 July 2016, para 3: “The ROC is not allowed to enter any athlete for the Olympic Games Rio 2016 who has ever been sanctioned for doping, even if he or she has served the sanction”.

  83. 83.

    CAS 2011/O/2422, USOC v. IOC, Award of 4 October 2011 and CAS 2011/A/2658, British Olympic Association (BOA) v. World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), Award of 30 April 2012.

  84. 84.

    CAS 2011/O/2422, USOC v. IOC, Award of 4 October 2011.

  85. 85.

    CAS OG 16/13, Anastasia Karabelshikova & Ivan Podshivalov v. FISA & IOC, Award of 4 August 2016, para 7.5 and CAS OG 16/04, Yulia Efimova v. ROC, IOC & FINA, Award of 4 August 2016, para 7.10.

  86. 86.

    CAS OG 16/13, para 7.11 and CAS OG 16/04, para 7.12.

  87. 87.

    CAS OG 16/13, para 7.16 and CAS OG 16/04, para 7.18.

  88. 88.

    CAS OG 16/13, para 7.17.

  89. 89.

    Ibid.

  90. 90.

    Ibid., para 7.18.

  91. 91.

    CAS OG 16/13, para 7.18 and CAS OG 16/04, para 7.25.

  92. 92.

    CAS OG 16/13, paras 7.19–7.22 and CAS OG 16/04, paras 7–17.

  93. 93.

    Reuters, Two Russians Rowers to Miss Rio despite Winning Doping Appeal, 5 August 2016. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-olympics-rio-rowing-cas-idUSKCN10G1WV. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  94. 94.

    Decision of the IOC Executive Board concerning the participation of Russian Athletes in the Olympic Games Rio 2016, IOC Decision of 24 July 2016, para 2: “The IFs to examine the information contained in the IP Report, and for such purpose seek from WADA the names of athletes and National Federations (NFs) implicated. Nobody implicated, be it an athlete, an official, or an NF, may be accepted for entry or accreditation for the Olympic Games.”.

  95. 95.

    CAS OG 16/19, Natalia Podolskaya & Alexander Dyachenko v. ICF, Award of 7 August 2016; CAS OG 16/21, Elena Anyushina & Alexey Korovashkov v. ICF & RCF, Award of 7 August 2016; CAS OG 16/12, Ivan Balandin v. FISA & IOC, Award of 4 August 2016. A fourth case, CAS OG 16/18, Kiril Sveshnikov et al. v. UCI & IOC, was declared inadmissible.

  96. 96.

    CAS OG 16/19, Natalia Podolskaya & Alexander Dyachenko v. ICF, Award of 7 August 2016, para 2.11.

  97. 97.

    Ibid.

  98. 98.

    Ibid.

  99. 99.

    Ibid.

  100. 100.

    Ibid., para 7.13.

  101. 101.

    Ibid., para 7.14.

  102. 102.

    Ibid., para 7.24.

  103. 103.

    Ibid., para 7.24.

  104. 104.

    Ibid., para 7.26.

  105. 105.

    Ibid., paras 7.15–7.26.

  106. 106.

    Ibid., para 7.18.

  107. 107.

    CAS OG 16/21, Elena Anyushina & Alexey Korovashkov v. ICF & RCF, Award of 7 August 2016, para 3.13.

  108. 108.

    Ibid., para 2.6.

  109. 109.

    Ibid., para 7.10.

  110. 110.

    Ibid., para 7.12.

  111. 111.

    Ibid., paras 7.15–17.

  112. 112.

    Ibid., para 7.20.

  113. 113.

    Ibid., para 7.21.

  114. 114.

    Ibid., paras 7.23–7.27.

  115. 115.

    Ibid., para 7.24.

  116. 116.

    Ibid., para 7.25.

  117. 117.

    Ibid.

  118. 118.

    CAS OG 16/12, Ivan Balandin v. FISA & IOC, Award of 4 August 2016, para 2.9.

  119. 119.

    Ibid., para 7.13.

  120. 120.

    Ibid.

  121. 121.

    Ibid., para 7.15.

  122. 122.

    Ibid., para 7.28.

  123. 123.

    Ibid., para 7.29.

  124. 124.

    Ibid.

  125. 125.

    Ibid., para 7.30.

  126. 126.

    Ibid.

  127. 127.

    Decision of the IOC Executive Board concerning the participation of Russian Athletes in the Olympic Games Rio 2016, IOC Decision of 24 July 2016, para 2: “The IFs should carry out an individual analysis of each athlete’s anti-doping record, taking into account only reliable adequate international tests, and the specificities of the athlete’s sport and its rules, in order to ensure a level playing field.”.

  128. 128.

    CAS OG 16/11, Daniil Andrienko et al. v. FISA & IOC, Award of 2 August 2016, para 2.6.

  129. 129.

    Ibid., para 7.3.

  130. 130.

    Ibid., para 7.4.

  131. 131.

    Ibid., para 7.5.

  132. 132.

    Ibid.

  133. 133.

    Ibid., para 7.6.

  134. 134.

    Ibid.

  135. 135.

    Ibid., para 7.7.

  136. 136.

    Ibid.

  137. 137.

    Ibid.

  138. 138.

    Ibid.

  139. 139.

    CAS OG 16/09, RWF v. IWF, Award of 3 August 2016, para 7.5.

  140. 140.

    Ibid.

  141. 141.

    Ibid., para 7.10.

  142. 142.

    Ibid.

  143. 143.

    Ibid.

  144. 144.

    Ibid.

  145. 145.

    Ibid., para 7.11.

  146. 146.

    Ibid., para 7.12.

  147. 147.

    Ibid.

  148. 148.

    Ibid.

  149. 149.

    Ibid.

  150. 150.

    Ibid., para 7.13.

  151. 151.

    Ibid.

  152. 152.

    Ibid.

  153. 153.

    Ibid.

  154. 154.

    Ibid., para 7.14.

  155. 155.

    Ibid.

  156. 156.

    Ibid.

  157. 157.

    BBC, Rio Olympics 2016: Russia’s Darya Klishina Banned by IAAF, 13 August 2016. http://www.bbc.com/sport/olympics/37073758. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  158. 158.

    CAS OG 16/24, Darya Klishina v. IAAF, Award of 15 August 2016, para 2.12.

  159. 159.

    Ibid.

  160. 160.

    Ibid., para 2.8.

  161. 161.

    CAS OG 16/13, Anastasia Karabelshikova and
Ivan Podshivalov v. World Rowing Federation (FISA) and
International Olympic Committee (IOC), Award of 4 August 2016, para 7.14 and CAS OG 16/12, Ivan Balandin v. FISA & IOC, Award of 4 August 2016, para 7.22.

  162. 162.

    CAS OG 16/24, Darya Klishina v. IAAF, Award of 15 August 2016, para 7.3.

  163. 163.

    Ibid., para 7.14.

  164. 164.

    Ibid., paras 7.40–45.

  165. 165.

    Ibid., para 7.24.

  166. 166.

    Ibid., para 7.34.

  167. 167.

    Ibid., para 7.35.

  168. 168.

    Ibid., para 7.46.

  169. 169.

    Ibid.

  170. 170.

    Ibid., para 7.56.

  171. 171.

    Ibid.

  172. 172.

    Ibid.

  173. 173.

    Ibid., para 7.57.

  174. 174.

    Ibid.

  175. 175.

    Ibid., para 7.58.

  176. 176.

    Ibid., para 7.60.

  177. 177.

    Ibid.

  178. 178.

    Ibid.

  179. 179.

    Ibid.

  180. 180.

    Ibid.

  181. 181.

    IOC Review Panel Decides on the Participation of Russian Athletes at the Olympic Games Rio 2016, IOC Press Release, 4 August 2016. https://www.olympic.org/news/ioc-review-panel-decides-on-the-participation-of-russian-athletes-at-the-olympic-games-rio-2016. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  182. 182.

    WADA Statement: Independent Investigation Confirms Russian State Manipulation of the Doping Control Process, WADA Press Release, 18 July 2016. https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2016-07/wada-statement-independent-investigation-confirms-russian-state-manipulation-of. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  183. 183.

    FINA: swimming’s governors surprised at anti-doping resignations, The Guardian, 4 September 2016.https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/sep/04/fina-swimming-governors-surprise-anti-doping-resignations. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  184. 184.

    IPC Constitution, Clause 2.1.1.

  185. 185.

    IPC Constitution, Clause 2.27.

  186. 186.

    CAS 2016/A/4745, Russian Paralympic Committee v. International Paralympic Committee, award of 23 August 2016, para 43.

  187. 187.

    Ibid., para 44.

  188. 188.

    Ibid., para 43.

  189. 189.

    Ibid., paras 54–55.

  190. 190.

    Ibid., para 56.

  191. 191.

    Ibid., para 59.

  192. 192.

    Ibid., para 60.

  193. 193.

    Ibid.

  194. 194.

    Ibid., para 73.

  195. 195.

    Ibid., para 76.

  196. 196.

    Ibid.

  197. 197.

    Ibid., para 79.

  198. 198.

    Ibid.

  199. 199.

    Ibid.

  200. 200.

    Ibid., para 81.

  201. 201.

    Ibid., para 82.

  202. 202.

    Ibid.

  203. 203.

    Ibid.

  204. 204.

    Ibid., para 86.

  205. 205.

    Ibid.

  206. 206.

    Ibid.

  207. 207.

    Ibid., para 83.

  208. 208.

    Ibid., para 84.

  209. 209.

    Ibid.

  210. 210.

    Ibid.

  211. 211.

    Ibid., para 88.

  212. 212.

    Ibid., para 89.

  213. 213.

    Ibid., para 91.

  214. 214.

    On the German rulings, see A Duval, The Russian Doping Scandal at the Court of Arbitration for Sport: The IPC’s Rio Ineligibility of the Russian Paralympic Athletes, ASSER International Sports Law Blog, 18 January 2017. http://www.asser.nl/SportsLaw/Blog/post/the-russian-doping-scandal-at-the-court-of-arbitration-for-sport-the-ipc-s-rio-ineligibility-of-russian-paralympic-athletes. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  215. 215.

    For such critical scrutiny, see Sean Ingle, The IOC has failed to Protect its Honest Athletes in the Doping Scandal, The Guardian, 31 July 2016. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2016/jul/31/ioc-russia-doping-athletes-rio-olympics. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  216. 216.

    See A Duval, The Russian Doping Scandal at the Court of Arbitration for Sport: The IPC’s Rio Ineligibility of the Russian Paralympic Athletes, ASSER International Sports Law Blog, 18 January 2017. http://www.asser.nl/SportsLaw/Blog/post/the-russian-doping-scandal-at-the-court-of-arbitration-for-sport-the-ipc-s-rio-ineligibility-of-russian-paralympic-athletes. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  217. 217.

    Nick Butler, What is Likely to Happen Next in the Struggle Against Russian Doping, Inside The Games, 16 January 2017. http://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1045894/nick-butler-what-is-likely-to-happen-next-in-the-struggle-against-russian-doping. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  218. 218.

    Declaration of the IOC Executive Board, IOC Press Release, 7 December 2016. https://www.olympic.org/news/declaration-of-the-ioc-executive-board. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  219. 219.

    Information on the Suspension of the Russian Paralympic Committee (RPC) by the IPC, IPC Press Release, 21 November 2016. https://www.paralympic.org//russian-paralympic-committee-suspension. Accessed 25 January 2017 and Standing Tall for Clean Athletes—IAAF Council Meeting, Day 2, IAAF Press Release, 1 December 2016. https://www.iaaf.org/news/press-release/council-meeting-2016-rusaf. Accessed 25 January 2017.

  220. 220.

    In this regard, I have outlined a number of potential reforms in Duval 2016b.

  221. 221.

    Latty 2011.

  222. 222.

    The idea that harmonizing the rules would be the miracle cure for doping was at the heart of the IOC’s drive for the creation of WADA. See IOC Medical Commission 1999. See also more recently Foschi 2006; Latty 2007, p. 411; DeFrantz 2009; and Mitten and Opie 2010, pp. 282–283.

  223. 223.

    On this old distinction, see Pound 1910.

  224. 224.

    As hoped by many, see for example Wagner 2011.

  225. 225.

    See on the prevalence of this pluralism Vidar Hanstad et al. 2010 and Soulé and Lestrelin 2012.

  226. 226.

    See Casini 2009.

  227. 227.

    For a similar conclusion framed differently, see Demesley and Trabal 2007 and Soulé and Lestrelin 2012, pp. 149–151.

  228. 228.

    Contrary to what some considered recently, see Casini 2009, p. 446. See also for high hopes Houlihan 2002.

  229. 229.

    Sassen 2006.

  230. 230.

    Calling for a similar new research agenda, see Amos and Fridman 2009, p. 368.

  231. 231.

    See the CAS cocaine cases reviewed in Duval 2015.

  232. 232.

    Already in favour of such a shift, see Demeslay and Trabal 2007, p. 160.

References

  • Amos A, Fridman S (2009) Drugs in sport: The legal issues. Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce, Media, Politics 12: 356–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casini L (2009) Global Hybrid Public-Private Bodies: The WADA. International Organizations Law Review 6: 421– 446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeFrantz AL (2009) Which Rules? International Sport and Doping in the 21st Century. Houston Journal of International Law 31: 1–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Demesley J, Trabal P (2007) De quelques contraintes du processus d’harmonisation des politiques antidopage (enquête). Terrains & Travaux 12: 138–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Duval A (2015) Cocaine, doping and the Court of Arbitration for Sport. The International Sports Law Journal, 15: 55–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duval A (2016a) Getting to the Games: The Olympic selection drama(s) at the Court of Arbitration for Sport. The International Sports Law Journal, 16: 52–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duval A (2016b) Tackling Doping Seriously - Reforming the World Anti-Doping System after the Russian Scandal. Asser Policy Brief 2016–02

    Google Scholar 

  • Foschi JK (2006) A Constant Battle: The Evolving Challenges in the International Fight Against Doping in Sport. Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law 16: 457–486

    Google Scholar 

  • Houlihan B (2002) Managing compliance in international anti-doping policy: The world anti-doping code. European Sport Management Quarterly, 2: 188–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IOC Medical Commission (1999) Report on Harmonisation of methods and measures in the fight against doping in sport

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann-Kohler G (2001) Arbitration at the Olympics. Kluwer Law International, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Latty F (2007) La lex sportiva: Recherche sur le droit transnational. Brill, Nijhoff, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Latty F (2011) Les Règles applicables aux relations sportives transnationales, Le regard de l’internationaliste publiciste. In : Bergé J-S et al (eds) La Fragmentation du droit applicable aux relations internationales, Regards croisés d’internationalistes privatistes et publicistes. Pedone, Paris, pp. 83–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitten MJ, Opie H (2010) “Sports Law”: Implications for the development of International, Comparative, and National Law and Global Dispute Resolution. Tulane Law Review 85: 269–322

    Google Scholar 

  • Pound R (1910) Law in Books and Law in Action. American Law Review 44: 12–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassen S (2006) Territory – Authority – Rights: From Medieval to Global Assemblages. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Soulé B, Lestrelin L (2012) Réguler le dopage? Les failles de la gouvernance sportive. ‟L’affaire Puerto” comme illustration. Revue européenne des sciences sociales 50: 127–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidar Hanstad D, Skille EÅ, Loland S (2010) Harmonization of anti-doping work: Myth or reality? Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce, Media, Politics 13: 418–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner U (2011) Towards the Construction of the World Anti-Doping Agency: Analyzing the Approaches of FIFA and the IAAF to Doping in Sport. European Sport Management Quarterly, 11: 445–470

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. International and European Sports Law, T.M.C. Asser Institute, R.J. Schimmelpennincklaan 20-22, 2517 JN, The Hague, The Netherlands

    Antoine Duval

Authors
  1. Antoine Duval
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antoine Duval .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. ASSER International Sports Law Centre, T.M.C. Asser Instituut, The Hague, The Netherlands

    Antoine Duval

  2. Faculté de droit, Université de Neuchâtel, Neuchâtel, Switzerland

    Antonio Rigozzi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 T.M.C. Asser Press and the authors

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Duval, A. (2017). The Russian Doping Scandal at the Court of Arbitration for Sport: Lessons for the World Anti-Doping System. In: Duval, A., Rigozzi, A. (eds) Yearbook of International Sports Arbitration 2016. Yearbook of International Sports Arbitration. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/15757_2017_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/15757_2017_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-236-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-6265-237-8

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation