| In recent years,the protection of sports human rights has become an important issue of public concern.The awareness of human rights of sports events participants has begun to wake up,and the international complaints institutions have not clearly defined sports human rights issues.In this context,many organizations have sprung up to try to make a difference in solving this problem,but most of them have some disadvantages in the system.This paper attempts to prove that the most suitable institution is to solve the human rights problems of sports by comparing the advantages and disadvantages of the institutions in the arbitration procedure.This paper is to start with the current situation of human rights in the field of international sports,and briefly summarize the main problems of human rights in sports,including the potential human rights violations in sports activities of athletes,venue builders,event service providers,three main arbitration institutions are summarized,including domestic courts,IOC ethics committee and international sports arbitration court.Some major sports management bodies implement the principles of international human rights law through soft management and institutional initiatives.Most of them are ostensibly positive,claiming that the norms of international human rights law are incorporated into the statutes and management documents of sports management institutions,but no substantial progress has been made;many domestic courts also try to solve such problems,but the sports human rights problems are often global and not limited to a certain country,which makes the domestic courts unable to do their best in jurisdiction and implementation;the state The IOC ethics committee also lacks independence and credibility due to its excessive dependence on the IOC.CAS,as the most influential international sports arbitration institution in the world,has been specialized in solving sports disputes from jurisdiction to enforcement through sports arbitration.Although there are some shortcomings,it is more feasible.The analysis of the existing human rights appeal adjudication system in sports field,centering on the main line of arbitration process,from the perspective of jurisdiction,domestic courts either voluntarily abandon jurisdiction or jurisdiction is restricted or lack of uniform standards in terms of jurisdiction,and CAS can be governed by compulsory arbitration agreement and not subject to personal jurisdiction.From the arbitration procedure,the author compares and analyzes the significant advantages of CAS by taking the application of the law of sports human rights,the neutrality of arbitration mechanism and the correction of unfair awards of sports institutions as the starting point.From the perspective of arbitration award enforcement,the paper expounds the ways to confirm and implement CAS award,including the active implementation of sports institutions and the implementation of New York Convention.In addition,CAS has the right to create law in judicial system,which can provide case for the settlement of similar cases.It is undeniable that CAS arbitration system has many shortcomings and shortcomings.This paper mainly analyzes the opaque composition of CAS arbitration tribunal personnel and the lack of human rights knowledge,the restriction of compulsory arbitration agreement on the rights of athletes’ litigation,the obstacles to execution and the denial of decisions of domestic courts.According to the above problems,the paper puts forward the direction of CAS reform in the future,improves the internal institutional setting and rules,strengthens the judicial review of arbitration award,and improves the neutrality and legitimacy of arbitration.Through comparative analysis and improvement of the implementation of the recommendations,it is revealed that CAS is still the best institution for arbitration of sports human rights. |
