Presentation on theme: "THE WORLD ANTIDOPING CODE: DOES THE END JUSTIFY THE MEANS?"— Presentation transcript:
1THE WORLD ANTIDOPING CODE: DOES THE END JUSTIFY THE MEANS? ByMichele ColucciEuropean College of Parma (Italy) –Tilburg University(The Netherlands)Website: -
2WADA Structure STRUCTURE Foundation Board Executive Committee Athlete CommitteeEducation CommitteeMedical & Research CommitteeTUE Working Committee
3WADA Foundation Board and Executive Committee 38 membersRepresentatives from the Olympic Movement and governmentsWADA’s supreme decision-making bodyEXecutive Committee10 Members (5 sports movement + 5 governments)
4WADA GOALS TO PROMOTE, TO COORDINATE, TO MONITOR...THE FIGHT AGAINST DOPING
5WADA PRIORITIES Code Compliance Monitoring Co-operation with Law EnforcementScience & MedicineAnti-doping Co-ordinationAnti-Doping DevelopmentEducation
6World Anti-Doping Program “To protect the Athletes’ fundamental right to participate in doping-free sport and thus promote health, fairness, and equality for Athletes worldwide; andTo ensure harmonized, coordinated, and effective anti-doping programs at the international and national level with regard to detection, deterrence, and prevention of doping.”
7World Anti-Doping Program The World Anti-Doping CodeInternational StandardsModels of Best Practice and Guidelines
8The World Anti-Doping Code “A LIVING DOCUMENT”“A framework for anti-doping policies, rules,and regulations for sport organizations and public authorities”To be implementedBy Sports organizations:compliance to the CODE (Olympic Charter). IF NOT, SANCTIONS!By Governments:UNESCO CONVENTION (2005) and its ratification
9DEFINITION OF DOPING“The occurrence of one or more of the anti-doping rule violations set forth in Article 2.1 through Article 2.8 of the Code”
10ANTI-DOPING RULE VIOLATIONS Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an Athlete’s SampleUse or Attempted Use by an Athlete of aProhibited Substance or a Prohibited MethodRefusing or failing without compelling justification to submit to Sample collection after notification authorized in applicable anti-doping rules, otherwise evading Sample collection
11Anti- Doping rule violations Violation of applicable requirements regarding Athlete availability for Out-of-Competition Testing, including failure to file required whereabouts information andmissed tests which are declared based on rules which comply with the International Standard for Testing.Tampering or Attempted Tampering with any part of Doping ControlPossession of Prohibited Substances and Prohibited MethodsTrafficking or Attempted Trafficking in any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method
12STRICT LIABILITY (art. 2.1.1) “It is each Athlete’s personal duty to ensure thatno Prohibited Substance enters his or her body.Athletes are responsible for any ProhibitedSubstance or its Metabolites or Markers foundto be present in their Samples. Accordingly, it isnot necessary that intent, fault, negligence orknowing Use on the Athlete’s part bedemonstrated in order to establish an antidopingviolation under Article 2.1”
13THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS Prohibited ListInternational Standard for TestingInternational Standard for LaboratoriesInternational Standard for Therapeutic Use ExemptionsInternational Standard for the Protection of Privacy and Personal Information
14CRITICAL ISSUES UNDER EU LAW PRIVACY AND DATA PROTECTIONLABOUR LAWCOMPETITION LAWFREEDOM TO MOVE AND TO PROVIDE SERVICES
15International Standard for Testing The “WHEREABOUTS” Information about “location” of Top Elite AthletsWho decides about the “ELITE”? The “RTP”Time framework issue: one hour a day from 6 am to 11 pm and 365 days a year!Is that reasonable?Is that proportionate?What about EU law?
16DIRECTIVE 2003/88/EC on “working time” Recital 5 : “All workers should have adequate rest periods. The concept of ‘rest’ must be expressed in units of time, i.e. in days, hours and/or fractions thereof. Community workers must be granted minimum daily, weekly and annual periods of rest and adequate breaks. It is also necessary in this context to place a maximum limit on weekly working hours.Art. 1 ‘rest period’: any period which is not working timeChapter 2 : Daily rest (11 hours),breaks (cba), weekly rest (24 hours), annual leave (4 weeks)
17Protection of Privacy and Personal Information DATA PROTECTION Create a set of minimum privacy protectionsRespect of national laws, BUTWHAT ABOUT EU LAW?The Role of Art. 29 Working Group
18Art. 29 Working Group Opinion 3/2008 of 1 August 2008 Code (entry into force: 1 January 2009)Second opinion 4/2009 of 6 April 2009International Standard for the Protection of Privacy and Personal Information (amended and approved by WADA on 9 May 2009)European Commission press release on 11 May 2009: “A successful outcome of cooperation between the EU and WADA”
19Directive 95/46/EC on Data Protection “Consent” is“any freely given specific and informed indication of his wishes by which the data subject signifies his agreement to personal data relating to him being processed”. (art.2 of Directive 95/46).
20Art. 29 working Group Opinion 3/2008: Art. 6.1 of Standards: the consent is not free nor informed!Opinion 4/2009:Art. 6.3.”The sanctions and consequences attached to a possible refusal by participants to subject themselves to the obligations of the Code (whereabouts) prevent the WP from considering that the consend would be, in any way, given freely”.
21Art. 29 working Group Processing of Data by ADO if: Public status National Public interest, BUT...CONI (necessity test: interest of the controller v. Protection of fundamental rights)“SENSITIVE DATA”DATA ABOUT OFFENCES
22ADAMS Anti-doping Administration & Management System A web-based data base managementNot mandatory in theory, yes in practice (Code)Data accessible to ADOs and IF worldwideNecessity test : “purpose of the contract”The retention periods:Whereabouts: “up to 18 months” (CODE).WP: justified only in case of an alleged whereabouts filing failure and/or missing test...Test planning, Test results, TUE, records of doping violations (up to 8 years)WP: yes for convictions, to retain samples, but not for Test planning or TUECall for a “more proportionate approach” for doping violations (See art. 2 of CODE)
23Art. 29 Workin groupArt :DOPING INFRINGEMENT, SANCTIONS, AND PUBLIC REPORT...ON ADOs WEB SITEFOR 1 YEARNO! NECESSITY AND PROPORTIONALITY
24EC TREATYART. 101 TFEU:Are incompatible (and void )with the common market all agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices which may:affect trade between Member Stateshave as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the common market
25Exceptions Agreements which contributes to improving: the production or distribution of goods or to promoting technical or economic progress, while allowing consumers a fair share of the resulting benefit,And which does not:(a) impose on the undertakings concerned restrictions which are not indispensable to the attainment of these objectives;(b) afford such undertakings the possibility of eliminating competition in respect of a substantial part of the products in questio
26ABUSE OF DOMINANT POSITION ART. 102 TFEU:Any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position within the common market or in a substantial part of it shall be prohibited as incompatible with the common market in so far as it may affect trade between Member States.
27ABUSE OF DOMINANT POSITION Such abuse may, in particular, consist in:(a) directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or selling prices or other unfair trading conditions;(b) limiting production, markets or technical development to the prejudice of consumers;(c) applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;(d) making the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.
28Basic Principles of Community Law EU law applies to Sport in so far it constitutes an economic activity (ECJ case law)No Activities “purely” social, artistic or sportingbut then “MECA MEDICA” judgement of 18 JulyTest of “Necessity”Test of “Proportionality”
29The Legal Methodology in the Meca Medina case STEP 1: Are the EU anti-trust rules, i.e. Articles 81 (101 and/or Art. 82 (102 EU) applicable to Sporting rules?STEP 2: If EC anti-trust rules are applicable, does the sporting rule fall outside the prohibition of Articles 81 (1) and 82?STEP 3: Can the rule be considered compatible with EC anti-trust rules because it fulfils the conditions of Article 81(3) EC or because of an objective justification under Article 82 EC?
30Step 11. Is the sports association that adopted the rule in question an “undertaking” or an“association of undertakings”?a. The sports association is an “undertaking” to the extent it carries out an “economic activity” itself.b. The sports association is an “association of undertakings” if its members carry out an economic activity.If no economic activity, Articles 81 and 82 do not applyIs trade between MS affected (geographical market, production market, Community interest...)?
31STEP 1 Is WADA subject to Art. 101 TFEU? WADA or IOC? ECJ, Eurocontrol case (March 2009)Economic services v. Regulatory activitiesMECA MEDINA
32Step 2Compatibility of rules with the Community rules on competition cannot be assessed in the abstract.Taking into account:“the overall context” in which the decision of the association of undertakings was taken or produces its effects.Its objectives: measures inherent in the pursuit of those objectives and proportionate to them.Proportionality of measures (quid sportive sanctions?)
33SANCTIONSPresence of prohibited substances/use or attempted use of prohibited substances:- 2 yearsRefusing or failing to submit to sample collection/Tampering with Doping Control:- 2 years (CAS: Mannini and Possanzini cqse)Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking/Administration or Attempted Administration of Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method:- a minimum of 4 years up to lifetimeWhereabouts Filing Failures and/or Missed Tests:- minimum 1 year and at maximum 2 yearSecond anti-doping rule violation:- from 4 years to lifetimeThird anti-doping rule violation:from 8 years to lifetimeBUT ALSO MORE FLEXIBILITY....in case of co-operation (reprimand and other sanctions)
34SANCTIONSArt No Athlete or other Person who has been declared Ineligible may, during the period of Ineligibility, participate in any capacity in a Competition or activity (other than authorized anti-doping education or rehabilitation programs) authorized or organized by any Signatory…Comment to Art :”For example, an ineligible Athlete cannot participate in a training camp, exhibition or practice organized byhis or her National Federation or a club which is a member of thatNational Federation.”
35Step 3Can the rule be considered compatible with EC anti-trust rules because it fulfils the conditions of Article 101(3) TFEU or because of an objective justification under Article 102 TFEU?Case by case approachNo General sports exception!
36FINDING THE RIGHT BALANCE CONCLUSIONEfficiency v. NecessityFight against doping v. Protection of fundamental rights...FINDING THE RIGHT BALANCE