Research On The "NSF" Clause Of Anti-doping Rules

In June 2016,China has already signed the UNESCO International Convention against Doping in Sports which includes World Anti-Doping Code 2003 as its appendix and requires Contracting Parties to take necessary anti-doping actions in countries and inter countries by complying with the World Anti-Doping Code principles,providing the legal framework of World Anti-Doping Code.According to the provisions of World Anti-Doping Code 2015,an anti-doping rules violation is confirmed without regarding to an Athlete's Fault.The Athlete is responsible for his or her anti-doping rules violation no matter the usage of prohibited substance is committed intentionally or unintentionally,or the anti-doping rules violation resulted from any fault or negligence.The anti-doping campaign is tough and the strict disciplinary rules is needed,but the rule-making and rule-execution should be treated modestly.And the disciplinary rules which can impact on the sport career of an Athlete should be with foreseeability.After the implementation of World Anti-Doping Code 2015,there is a new clause for Reduction of the Period of Ineligibility based on No Significant Fault or Negligence.But there is no material explanation on the clause,thus the discretion will be applied.Based on the cases which is relative to the clause of No Significant Fault or Negligence from Court of Arbitration for Sport,the results of the application of the clause differs widely.Therefore,the author of this thesis decides to research on the clause and get a conclusion of the specific approach to application of the clause.There is a brief description of the background of the clause and anti-doping rules violations and an introduction of strict liability principle and proportionality principle in the first part of the main body of this thesis.Then comparing the different provisions of Athlete's fault between new version and old version of World Anti-Doping Codes.Then subsequently analyzing on the clause and getting conclusions that the criteria of fault degree assessment is too vague,the relief from obligation for a minor to establish how the prohibited substance entered his or her system is unreasonable and the setting of the period of ineligibility is inappropriate.Then study on the Court of Arbitration for Sport cases and get objective elements and subjective elements of categorial-classification(light degree of fault,moderate degree of fault and considerable degree of fault).In the last,proposals should be offered to amend the clause—setting the criteria and approach of fault degree assessment,adding the duty of establishing how the prohibited substance entered a minor's system and adjusting the period of ineligibility,to correct the translation errors in World Anti-Doping Code 2015(Chinese version)and to amend the General Rules of Anti-Doping Control in Sport.