Doping and Human Rights in Pariah States
On first reading, case 2016/A/4708 Belarus Canoe Association and Belarusian Senior Men’s Canoe and Kayak Team Members v International Canoe Federation, award of 23 January 2017 (hereafter BCA v ICF) raises three familiar, deceptively simple, themes in ant
- PDF / 314,075 Bytes
- 21 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 14 Downloads / 195 Views
Doping and Human Rights in Pariah States
3
David McArdle
4
Contents
5 6
1 Facts and Procedure of the Case......................................................................................... 2 The Decision........................................................................................................................ 3 State Actors, Convention Obligations and Anti-doping..................................................... 4 Back in the USSR ............................................................................................................... 5 Towards a New Perspective on Sport, Doping and Human Rights................................... 6 Conclusion: Taking Rights Seriously?................................................................................ References ..................................................................................................................................
1
8 7 10 9 11 12 14 13 16 15 18 17
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Abstract On first reading, case 2016/A/4708 Belarus Canoe Association and Belarusian Senior Men’s Canoe and Kayak Team Members v International Canoe Federation, award of 23 January 2017 (hereafter BCA v ICF) raises three familiar, deceptively simple, themes in anti-doping. Namely, the potential role of national criminal authorities in doping investigations; the relationship between those authorities and international sporting stakeholders; and the importance of those stakeholders adhering to their own rules when pursuing anti-doping allegations. This chapter addresses those aspects in detail, but the case has a significance that goes beyond anti-doping. Specifically, BCA v ICF raises wider issues about anti-doping actors whose obligations under the WADA regime cannot be easily reconciled with their reliance on governments that use sports as a tool for cronyism and furthering political agendas. Such is the case in Belarus, where the relationship between a supposedly independent national anti-doping authority and an ignoble
CAS 2016/A/4708, Belarus Canoe Association and Belarusian Senior Men’s Canoe and Kayak Team Members v International Canoe Federation, Award of 23 January 2017. D. McArdle (&) School of Law, Stirling University, Stirling, Scotland, UK e-mail: [email protected] Yearbook of International Sports Arbitration https://doi.org/10.1007/15757_2019_28 © T.M.C. ASSER PRESS and the authors
1
2
D. McArdle
34
and unhappy regime appears uncomfortably close. These concerns are compounded by sports federations which are only too happy to let Europe’s last dictatorship host their international events.
36 35
Keywords Doping
37
1 Facts and Procedure of the Case
32 33
38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53
On 12 April 2016, French police and customs officials raided the training camp of the Belarus Canoe and Kayak team at Le Temple-sur-Lot, some 130 km south-east of Bordeaux. Various substances, medications and materials that could be used for blood transfusions were confiscated, along with 16 capsules of
Data Loading...
