The IPCA Anti-Doping Code was first published in May 2019, and amended in 2019.

This version of the IPCA Anti-Doping Code was approved by the IPCA Presidential Board on the 02 July 2019 and will take effect as of 03 July 2019.

Table of Contents

PREAMBLE Fundamental Rationale for the Code and IF’s Anti-Doping Rules –

Scope –

ARTICLE 1: DEFINITION OF DOPING –

ARTICLE 2: ANTI-DOPING RULE VIOLATIONS –

2.1 The presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers, in an Athlete’s Sample –

2.2 Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method –

2.3 Evading, Refusing or Failing to Submit to Sample Collection –

2.4 Whereabouts Failures –

2.5 Tampering, or Attempted Tampering, with any Part Of Doping Control –

2.6 Possession of Prohibited Substances and Methods –

2.7 Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking in any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method –

2.8 Administration or Attempted Administration –

2.9 Complicity –

2.10 Prohibited Association –

ARTICLE 3: PROOF OF DOPING –

3.1 Burdens and Standards of Proof –

3.2 Methods of Establishing Facts and Presumptions –

ARTICLE 4: THE PROHIBITED LIST –

4.1 Publication and Revision of the Prohibited List –

4.2 Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods Identified on the Prohibited List –

4.3 WADA’s Determination of the Prohibited List –

4.4 Therapeutic Use Exemptions (“TUEs”) –

ARTICLE 5: TESTING AND INVESTIGATIONS –

5.1 Purpose of Testing and Investigations –

5.2 Authority to conduct Testing –

5.3 Test Distribution Plan –

5.4 Standards for Testing –

5.5 Coordination of Testing –

5.6 Athlete Whereabouts Requirements –

5.7 Retirement and Return to Competition –

5.8 Independent Observer Program –

ARTICLE 6: ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES –

6.1 Use of Approved Laboratories –

6.2 Purpose of Collection and Analysis of Samples –

6.3 Research on Samples –

6.4 Standards for Sample Analysis and Reporting –

6.5 ReTestingSamples –

ARTICLE 7: RESULTS MANAGEMENT –

7.1 Responsibility for conducting Results Management –

7.2 Provisional Suspensions –

7.3 Review of Atypical Findings –

7.4 Review of Atypical Passport Findings and Adverse Passport Findings –

7.5 Results Management for Tests initiated by National Federations –

7.6 Results Management for Whereabouts Violations –

7.7 Retirement from Sport –

7.8 Identification of Prior Anti-Doping Rule Violations –

7.9 Notification of Results Management Decisions –

ARTICLE 8: RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING –

8.1 Hearings following The IPCA result management –

8.2 Hearings following National Federations result management –

8.3 Principles for a Fair Hearing –

ARTICLE 9: AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFICATION OF INDIVIDUAL RESULTS –

ARTICLE 10: SANCTIONS ON INDIVIDUALS –

10.1 Disqualification of Results in IPCA Sanctioned Events –

10.2 Ineligibility for Presence, Use or Attempted Use, or Possession of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method

10.3 Ineligibility for Other Anti-Doping Rule Violations –

10.4 Elimination of the Period of Ineligibility where there is No Fault or Negligence –

10.5 Reduction of the Period of Ineligibility based on No Significant Fault or Negligence –

10.6 Elimination, Reduction, or Suspension of Period of Ineligibility or other Consequences for Reasons Other than Fault

10.7 Multiple Violations –

10.8 Disqualification of Results in Competitions Subsequent to Sample Collection or Commission of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation –

10.9 Allocation of CAS Cost Awards and Forfeited Prize Money –

10.10 Financial Consequences –

10.11 Commencement of Ineligibility Period –

10.12 Status During Ineligibility –

10.13 Automatic Publication of Sanction –

ARTICLE 11: CONSEQUENCES TO TEAM IN TEAM SPORTS AND INDIVIDUAL SPORTS –

11.1 Testing of Team Sports –

11.2 Consequences for Team Sports –

11.3 Event Ruling Body May Establish Stricter Consequences to Team Sports –

11.4 Consequences for Teams in Individual Sports –

ARTICLE 12: SANCTIONS AGAINST SIGNATORIES AND AGAINST SPORTING BODIES THAT ARE NOT SIGNATORIES –

ARTICLE 13: APPEALS –

13.1 Decisions Subject to Appeal –

13.2 Appeals from Decisions Regarding Anti-Doping Rule Violations, Consequences, Provisional Suspensions, Recognition of Decisions and Jurisdiction –

13.3 Failure to Render a Timely Decision –

13.4 Appeals from Decisions Granting or Denying a TUE –

13.5 Notification of Appeal Decisions –

13.6 Appeals from decisions under Article 23.5.5 –

13.7 Time for Filing Appeals –

ARTICLE 14: CONFIDENTIALITY, NOTICE AND REPORTING –

14.1 Information Concerning Adverse Analytical Findings and Other Potential Anti-Doping Rule Violations

14.2 Notice of Anti-Doping Rule Violation Decisions and Request for Files –

14.3 Public Disclosure –

14.4 Statistical Reporting –

14.5 Doping Control Information Clearing House –

14.6 Data Privacy –

ARTICLE 15: APPLICATION AND RECOGNITION OF DECISIONS –

ARTICLE 16: INCORPORATION OF IPCA ANTI-DOPING CODE AND OBLIGATIONS OF NATIONAL FEDERATIONS –

ARTICLE 17: STATUTE OF LIMITATION –

ARTICLE 18: EDUCATION –

ARTICLE 19: REINSTATEMENT –

ARTICLE 20: RESEARCH –

ARTICLE 21: INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE –

ARTICLE 22: ADDITIONAL ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF ATHLETES AND OTHER PERSONS

ARTICLE 23: ACCEPTANCE, COMPLIANCE AND MODIFICATION –

APPENDIX: DEFINITIONS –

PREAMBLE

The International Physically Disabled Chess Association (IPCA) adopted and implemented Anti-Doping Policies and Rules (The Code) in compliance with the general principles of the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC) elaborated by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), expecting that, in the spirit of sport, it will lead the fight against doping in sport for people with cerebral palsy, traumatic brain injury, stroke or similar conditions (Athletes), that play Physically Disabled Chess.

Anti-Doping Rules, like Competition rules, are sport rules governing the conditions under which sport is played. Athletes and other Persons accept these rules as a condition of participation and shall be bound by them. These sport-specific rules and procedures, aimed at enforcing anti-doping principles in a global and harmonized manner, are distinct in nature and, therefore, not intended to be subject to, or limited by any national requirements and legal standards applicable to criminal proceedings or employment matters. When reviewing the facts and the law of a given case, all courts, arbitral tribunals and other adjudicating bodies should be aware of and respect the distinct nature of the anti-doping rules in the WADC and the fact that these rules represent the consensus of a broad spectrum of stakeholders around the world with an interest in fair sport.

Fundamental Rationale for the Code and IF’s Anti-Doping Rules

Anti-doping programs seek to preserve what is intrinsically valuable about sport. This intrinsic value is often referred to as “the spirit of sport”; it is the essence of the Paralympic Movement; it is how we play true. The spirit of sport is the celebration of the human spirit, body and mind, and is characterized by the following values:

– Ethics, fair play and honesty

– Health

– Excellence in performance

– Character and education

– Fun and joy

– Teamwork

– Dedication and commitment

– Respect for rules and laws

– Respect for self and other Participants

– Courage

– Community and solidarity

– Doping is fundamentally contrary to the spirit of sport

This Code shall apply to the IPCA World Chess Championsips and to all Competitions sanctioned by the IPCA and to the sport practice within the context of the Physically Disabled Chess movement including the time of preparation for Competitions.

In this case, the Anti-Doping Committee (Anti-Doping Officer) had the role and the responsibility:

To provide the IPCA Presidential Board with advice on all policy matters related to anti-doping and the fight against doping in sport – in particular:

To revise the IPCA Anti-Doping Code and corresponding guidelines and documents, as required.

To establish In-Competition Testing policies for all IPCA sanctioned Competition, including for the IPCA World Chess Championsips, and Out-of-Competition Testing policies.

To represent The IPCA in results management matters in accordance with the IPCA Anti-Doping Code.

To promote the fight against doping in sport through educational programs.

To maintain strong relations with other Anti-Doping Organizations, including WADA, regarding Anti-Doping related issues.

To collaborate with other relevant IPC committees.

To manage the development of educational Anti-Doping material.

To work closely with, and collaborate as appropriate, with the IPCA Presidential Board

To liaise with the IPCA Classification and others IPCA Committee’s.

To consider, and as appropriate, develop, the IPCA Anti-Doping Committee.

The The Code sets forth specific anti-doping rules and principles that are to be followed in the sport for people that play Physically Disabled Chess and in all Competition organized under the responsibility of the IPCA. Participants shall be bound to comply with these anti-doping rules, adopted in conformance with the WADC.

Competition

Each National Sport Organization of IPCA shall establish rules and procedures to ensure that all participants are informed of and agree to be bound by the Code.

Scope

This Code shall apply to the IPCA, each National Federation of the IPCA, and each Participant in the activities of the IPCA or any of its National Federations by virtue of the Participant’s membership, accreditation, or participation in the IPCA, its National Federations, or their activities or Events.

To be eligible for participation in IPCA Events, Participants must have an IPCA license issued by his or her National Federation. The IPCA license will only be issued to Participants who have personally signed the Appendix 2 (Anti-Doping Declaration form) in the actual form approved by the the IPCA Presidential Board.

The National Federation must guarantee that all Athletes registered for IPCA License accept the Rules of the IPCA, including the Code.

It is the responsibility of each National Federation to ensure that all national-level Testing on the National Federation’s Athletes complies with the Code. In some countries, the National Federation itself will be conducting the Doping Control described in the Code. In other countries, many of the Doping Control responsibilities of the National Federation have been delegated or assigned by statute or agreement to a National Anti-Doping Organization. In those countries, references in the Code to the National Federation shall apply, as appropriate, to the National Anti-Doping Organization.

The Code shall apply to all Doping Controls over which the IPCA and its National Federations have jurisdiction.

Within the overall pool of Athletes set out above who are bound by and required to comply with the Code, the following Athletes shall be considered to be International-Level Athletes for purposes of the Code, and therefore the specific provisions in the Code applicable to International-Level Athletes (as regards Testing but also as regards TUEs, whereabouts information, results management, and appeals) shall apply to such Athletes: all Athletes who participate in Events or Competitions organized by the IPCA or where the IPCA is the ruling body; and all Athletes who are members of the IPCA or who hold a license issued by the IPCA.

ARTICLE 1 DEFINITION OF DOPING

Doping is defined as 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.

ARTICLE 2 ANTI-DOPING RULE VIOLATIONS

The purpose of Article 2 is to specify the circumstances and conduct which constitute anti-doping rule violations. Hearings in doping cases will proceed based on the assertion that one or more of these specific rules have been violated.

Athletes and other Persons shall be responsible for knowing what constitutes an Anti-Doping Rule Violation and the substances and methods which have been included on the Prohibited List.

The following constitute Anti-Doping Rule Violations:

2.1 The presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers, in an Athlete’s Sample

2.1.1 It is each Athlete’s personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters his or her body. Athletes are responsible for any Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found to be present in their Samples. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, Fault, negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an Anti-Doping violation under Article 2.1.

[Comment to Article 2.1.1: An anti-doping rule violation is committed under this Article without regard to an Athlete’s Fault. This rule has been referred to in various CAS decisions as “Strict Liability”. An Athlete’s Fault is taken into consideration in determining the Consequences of this anti-doping rule violation under Article 10. This principle has consistently been upheld by CAS.]

2.1.2 Sufficient proof of an anti-doping rule violation under Article 2.1 is established by any of the following: presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in the Athlete’s A Sample where the Athlete waives analysis of the B Sample and the B Sample is not analysed; or, where the Athlete’s B Sample is analysed and the analysis of the Athlete’s B Sample confirms the presence of the Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found in the Athlete’s A Sample; or, where the Athlete’s B Sample is split into two bottles and the analysis of the second bottle confirms the presence of the Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found in the first bottle.

[Comment to Article 2.1.2: The Anti-Doping Organization may in its discretion choose to have the B Sample analyzed even if the Athlete does not request the analysis of the B Sample.]

2.1.3 Excepting those substances for which a quantitative threshold is specifically identified in the Prohibited List, the presence of any quantity of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an Athlete’s Sample shall constitute an anti-doping rule violation.

2.1.4 As an exception to the general rule of Article 2.1, the Prohibited List or other International Standards may establish special criteria for the evaluation of Prohibited Substances that can also be produced endogenously.

2.2 Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method

[Comment to Article 2.2: It has always been the case that Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method may be established by any reliable means. As noted in the Comment to Article 3.2 (Methods of Establishing Facts and Presumptions), unlike the proof required to establish an Anti-Doping Rule Violation under Article 2.1, Use or Attempted Use may also be established by other reliable means such as admissions by the Athlete, witness statements, documentary evidence, conclusions drawn from longitudinal profiling, including data collected as part of the Athlete Biological Passport, or other analytical information which does not otherwise satisfy all the requirements to establish “Presence” of a Prohibited Substance under Article 2.1. For example, Use may be established based upon reliable analytical data from the analysis of an A Sample (without confirmation from an analysis of a B Sample) or from the analysis of a B Sample alone where the Anti- Doping Organization provides a satisfactory explanation for the lack of confirmation in the other Sample.]

2.2.1 It is each Athlete’s personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters his or her body and that no Prohibited Method is Used. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, Fault, negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an Anti-Doping violation for Use of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method.

2.2.2 The success or failure of the Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is not material. It is sufficient that the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method was Used or Attempted to be Used for an Anti-Doping Rule Violation to be committed.

[Comment to Article 2.2.2: Demonstrating the “Attempted Use” of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method requires proof of intent on the Athlete’s part. The fact that intent may be required to prove this particular Anti-Doping Rule Violation does not undermine the Strict Liability principle established for violations of Article 2.1 and violations of Article 2.2 in respect of Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.

An Athlete’s Use of a Prohibited Substance constitutes an Anti-Doping Rule Violation unless such substance is not prohibited Out-of-Competition and the Athlete’s Use takes place Out-of-Competition. (However, the presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in a Sample collected In-Competition is a violation of Article 2.1 (Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers) regardless of when that substance might have been administered.)]

2.3 Evading, Refusing or Failing to Submit to Sample Collection

Evading Sample collection, or without compelling justification refusing or failing to submit to Sample collection after notification as authorized in the Code or other applicable anti-doping rules.

[Comment to Article 2.3: For example, it would be an anti-doping rule violation of “evading Sample collection” if it were established that an Athlete was deliberately avoiding a Doping Control official to evade notification or Testing. A violation of “failing to submit to Sample collection” may be based on either intentional or negligent conduct of the Athlete, while “evading” or “refusing” Sample collection contemplates intentional conduct by the Athlete.]

2.4 Whereabouts Failures

Any combination of three missed tests and/or filing failures, as defined in the International Standard for Testing and Investigations, within a twelve-month period by an Athlete in a Registered Testing Pool.

2.5 Tampering, or Attempted Tampering, with any Part of Doping Control

Conduct which subverts the Doping Control process but which would not otherwise be included in the definition of Prohibited Methods. Tampering shall include, without limitation, intentionally interfering or attempting to interfere with a Doping Control official, providing fraudulent information to an Anti-Doping Organization, or intimidating or attempting to intimidate a potential witness.

[Comment to Article 2.5: This Article prohibits conduct which subverts the Doping Control process but which would not otherwise be included in the definition of Prohibited Methods. For example, this article would prohibit altering identification numbers on a Doping Control Form during Testing, breaking the B Bottle at the time of B Sample analysis or altering a Sample by the addition of a foreign substance. Offensive conduct towards a Doping Control official or other Person involved in Doping Control which does not otherwise constitute Tampering shall be addressed in the disciplinary rules of sport organizations.]

2.6 Possession of Prohibited Substances and Methods

Possession by an Athlete In-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method, or Possession by an Athlete Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method which is prohibited Out-of-Competition unless the Athlete establishes that the Possession is consistent with a Therapeutic Use Exemption (“TUE”) granted in accordance with Article 4.4 or other acceptable justification.

Possession by an Athlete Support Person In-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method, or Possession by an Athlete Support Person Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method which is prohibited Out-of-Competition in connection with an Athlete, Competition or training, unless the Athlete Support Person establishes that the Possession is consistent with a TUE granted to an Athlete in accordance with Article 4.4 or other acceptable justification.

[Comment to Articles 2.6.1 and 2.6.2: Acceptable justification would not include, for example, buying or Possessing a Prohibited Substance for purposes of giving it to a friend or relative, except under justifiable medical circumstances where that Person had a physician’s prescription, e.g., buying Insulin for a diabetic child.]

[Comment to Article 2.6.2: Acceptable justification would include, for example, a team doctor carrying Prohibited Substances for dealing with acute and emergency situations.]

2.7 Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking in any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method

2.8 Administration or Attempted Administration

To any Athlete In-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method, or Administration or Attempted Administration to any Athlete Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method that is prohibited Out-of-Competition

2.9 Complicity

Assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, conspiring, covering up or any other type of intentional complicity involving an anti-doping rule violation, Attempted anti-doping rule violation or violation of Article 10.12.1 by another Person.

2.10 Prohibited Association

Association by an Athlete or other Person subject to the authority of the IPCA in a professional or sport-related capacity with any Athlete Support Person who:

2.10.1 If subject to the authority of an Anti-Doping Organization, is serving a period of Ineligibility; or

2.10.2 If not subject to the authority of an Anti-Doping Organization and where Ineligibility has not been addressed in a results management process pursuant to the Code, has been convicted or found in a criminal, disciplinary or professional proceeding to have engaged in conduct which would have constituted a violation of anti-doping rules if Code-compliant rules had been applicable to such Person. The disqualifying status of such Person shall be in force for the longer of six years from the criminal, professional or disciplinary decision or the duration of the criminal, disciplinary or professional sanction imposed; or

2.10.3 Is serving as a front or intermediary for an individual described in Article 2.10.1 or 2.10.2.

In order for this provision to apply, it is necessary that the Athlete or other Person has previously been advised in writing by an Anti-Doping Organization with jurisdiction over the Athlete or other Person, or by WADA, of the Athlete Support Person’s disqualifying status and the potential Consequence of prohibited association and that the Athlete or other Person can reasonably avoid the association. The Anti-Doping Organization shall also use reasonable efforts to advise the Athlete Support Person who is the subject of the notice to the Athlete or other Person that the Athlete Support Person may, within 15 days, come forward to the Anti-Doping Organization to explain that the criteria described in Articles 2.10.1 and 2.10.2 do not apply to him or her. (Notwithstanding Article 17, this Article applies even when the Athlete Support Person’s disqualifying conduct occurred prior to the effective date provided in Article 20.7.)

The burden shall be on the Athlete or other Person to establish that any association with Athlete Support Personnel described in Article 2.10.1 or 2.10.2 is not in a professional or sport-related capacity.

Anti-Doping Organizations that are aware of Athlete Support Personnel who meet the criteria described in Article 2.10.1, 2.10.2, or 2.10.3 shall submit that information to WADA.

[Comment to Article 2.10: Athletes and other Persons must not work with coaches, trainers, physicians or other Athlete Support Personnel who are Ineligible on account of an anti-doping rule violation or who have been criminally convicted or professionally disciplined in relation to doping. Some examples of the types of association which are prohibited include: obtaining training, strategy, technique, nutrition or medical advice; obtaining therapy, treatment or prescriptions; providing any bodily products for analysis; or allowing the Athlete Support Person to serve as an agent or representative. Prohibited association need not involve any form of compensation.]

ARTICLE 3: PROOF OF DOPING

3.1 Burdens and Standards of Proof

The IPCA and its National Federations shall have the burden of establishing that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation has occurred. The standard of proof shall be whether the IPCA or its National Federations has established an Anti-Doping Rule Violation to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing body bearing in mind the seriousness of the allegation which is made. This standard of proof in all cases is greater than a mere balance of probability but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Where these rules place the burden of proof upon the Athlete or other Person alleged to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation to rebut a presumption or establish specified facts or circumstances, the standard of proof shall be by a balance of probability.

[Comment to Article 3.1: This standard of proof required to be met by the IPCA or its National Federations is comparable to the standard which is applied in most countries to cases involving professional misconduct.]

3.2 Methods of Establishing Facts and Presumptions.

Facts related to anti-doping rule violations may be established by any reliable means, including admissions. The following rules of proof shall be applicable in doping cases:

[Comment to Article 3.2: For example, The IPCA or its National Federations may establish an Anti- Doping Rule Violation under Article 2.2 (Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method) based on the Athlete’s admissions, the credible testimony of third Persons, reliable documentary evidence, reliable analytical data from either an A or B Sample as provided in the Comments to Article 2.2, or conclusions drawn from the profile of a series of the Athlete’s blood or urine Samples, such as data from the Athlete Biological Passport.]

3.2.1 Analytical methods or decision limits approved by WADA after consultation within the relevant scientific community and which has been the subject of peer review are presumed to be scientifically valid. Any Athlete or other Person seeking to rebut this presumption of scientific validity shall, as a condition precedent to any such challenge, first notify WADA of the challenge and the basis of the challenge. CAS on its own initiative may also inform WADA of any such challenge. At WADA’s request, the CAS panel shall appoint an appropriate scientific expert to assist the panel in its evaluation of the challenge. Within 10 days of WADA’s receipt of such notice, and WADA’s receipt of the CAS file, WADA shall also have the right to intervene as a party, appear amicus curiae, or otherwise provide evidence in such proceeding.

3.2.2 WADA-accredited laboratories, and other laboratories approved by WADA, are presumed to have conducted Sample analysis and custodial procedures in accordance with the International Standard for Laboratories. The Athlete or other Person may rebut this presumption by establishing that a departure from the International Standard for Laboratories occurred which could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding. If the Athlete or other Person rebuts the preceding presumption by showing that a departure from the International Standard for Laboratories occurred which could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding, then the IPCA or its National Federations shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding.

[Comment to Article 3.2.2: The burden is on the Athlete or other Person to establish, by a balance of probability, a departure from the International Standard for Laboratories that could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding. If the Athlete or other Person does so, the burden shifts to the IPCA or its National Federations to prove to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel that the departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding.]

3.2.3 Departures from any other International Standard or other anti-doping rule or policy set forth in the Code, which did not cause an Adverse Analytical Finding or other anti-doping rule violation, shall not invalidate such evidence or results. If the Athlete or other Person establishes a departure from another International Standard or other anti-doping rule or policy which could reasonably have caused an anti-doping rule violation based on an Adverse Analytical Finding or other anti-doping rule violation, then the IPCA or its National Federations shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding or the factual basis for the anti-doping rule violation.

3.2.4 The facts established by a decision of a court or professional disciplinary tribunal of competent jurisdiction which is not the subject of a pending appeal shall be irrefutable evidence against the Athlete or other Person to whom the decision pertained of those facts unless the Athlete or other Person establishes that the decision violated principles of natural justice.

3.2.5 The hearing body in a hearing on an Anti-Doping Rule Violation may draw an inference adverse to the Athlete or other Person who is asserted to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation based on the Athlete’s or other Person’s refusal, after a request made in a reasonable time in advance of the hearing, to appear at the hearing (either in Person or telephonically as directed by the hearing body) and to answer questions from the hearing body or the IPCA or the National Federation asserting the Anti- Doping Rule Violation.

ARTICLE 4: THE PROHIBITED LIST

4.1 Publication and Revision of the Prohibited List

The Code incorporate the Prohibited List, which is published and revised by WADA as, described in Article 4.1 of the Code. The IPCA will make the current Prohibited List available to each National Federation, and each National Federation shall ensure that the current Prohibited List is available to its members and constituents.

[Comment to Article 4.1: The Prohibited List will be revised and published on an expedited basis whenever the need arises. However, for the sake of predictability, a new Prohibited List will be published every year whether or not changes have been made. The Prohibited List in force is available on WADA’s website at www.wada-ama.org.The Prohibited List is an integral part of the International Convention against Doping in Sport.]

4.2 Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods Identified on the Prohibited List

4.2.1. Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods

Unless provided otherwise in the Prohibited List and/or a revision, the Prohibited List and revisions shall go into effect under WADC three months after publication of the Prohibited List by WADA without requiring any further action by the IPCA or its National Federations.

As described in Article 4.2.1 of the WADC, the IPCA may request that WADA expand the Prohibited List for the sport of Physically Disabled Chess. The IPCA may also request that WADA include additional substances or methods, which have the potential for abuse in the sport of Physically Disabled Chess, in the monitoring program described in Article 4.5 of the WADC. As provided in the WADC, WADA shall make the final decision on such requests by the IPCA.

4.2.2 Specified Substances

For purposes of the application of Article 10 (Sanctions on Individuals), all Prohibited Substances shall be “Specified Substances” except (a) substances in the classes of anabolic agents and hormones; and (b) those stimulants and hormone antagonists and modulators so identified on the Prohibited List. Prohibited Methods shall not be Specified Substances.

[Comment to Article 4.2.2: The Specified Substances identified in Article 4.2.2 should not in any way be considered less important or less dangerous than other doping substances. Rather, they are simply substances which are more likely to have been consumed by an Athlete for a purpose other than the enhancement of sport performance.]

4.3 WADA’s Determination of the Prohibited List

WADA’s determination of the Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods that will be included on the Prohibited List, the classification of substances into categories on the Prohibited List, and the classification of a substance as prohibited at all times or In-Competition only, is final and shall not be subject to challenge by an Athlete or other Person based on an argument that the substance or method was not a masking agent or did not have the potential to enhance performance, represent a health risk or violate the spirit of sport.

4.4 Therapeutic Use Exemptions (“TUEs”)

4.4.1 The presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers, and/or the Use or Attempted Use, Possession or Administration or Attempted Administration of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method, shall not be considered an anti-doping rule violation if it is consistent with the provisions of a TUE granted in accordance with the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions.

4.4.2 Athletes included by The IPCA in its Registered Testing Pool and other Athletes participating in an International Event identified by the IPCA must obtain a TUE from or recognized by The IPCA. The application for a TUE must be made as soon as possible (in the case of an Athlete in the Registered Testing Pool, this would be when he/she is first notified of his/her inclusion in the pool) and in any event (save in emergency situations) no later than 30 days before the Athlete’s participation in the Event. TUE granted by The IPCA shall be reported to the Athlete’s National Federation, and to WADA through ADAMS.

4.4.2.1. Where the Athlete already has a TUE granted by his or her National Anti-Doping Organization for the substance or method in question, that TUE is not automatically valid for international-level Competition. However, the Athlete may apply to the IPCA to recognize that TUE, in accordance with Article 7 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions. If that TUE meets the criteria set out in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, then the IPCA shall recognize it for purposes of international-level Competition as well. If The IPCA considers that the TUE does not meet those criteria and so refuses to recognize it, the IPCA shall notify the Athlete and his or her National Anti-Doping Organization promptly, with reasons. The Athlete and the National Anti-Doping Organization shall have 21 days from such notification to refer the matter to WADA for review in accordance with Article 4.4.6. If the matter is referred to WADA for review, the TUE granted by the National Anti-Doping Organization remains valid for national-level Competition and Out-of-Competition Testing (but is not valid for international-level Competition) pending WADA’s decision. If the matter is not referred to WADA for review, the TUE becomes invalid for any purpose when the 21-day review deadline expires.

[Comment to Article 4.4.2.1: Further to Articles 5.6 and 7.1(a) of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, the IPCA may publish notice on its website www.IPCA.com that it will automatically recognize TUE decisions (or categories of such decisions, e.g., as to particular substances or methods) made by National Anti-Doping Organizations. If an Athlete’s TUE falls into a category of automatically recognized TUEs, then he/she does not need to apply to The IPCAfor recognition of that TUE.

If The IPCA refuses to recognize a TUE granted by a National Anti-Doping Organization only because medical records or other information are missing that are needed to demonstrate satisfaction of the criteria in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, the matter should not be referred to WADA. Instead, the file should be completed and re-submitted The IPCA.]

4.4.2.2 If the Athlete does not already have a TUE granted by his/her National Anti-Doping Organization for the substance or method in question, the Athlete must apply directly to The IPCA for a TUE in accordance with the process set out in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions [using the form posted on the IPCA’s website at www.IPCA.com .] If the IPCA denies the Athlete’s application, it must notify the Athlete promptly, with reasons. If the IPCA grants the Athlete’s application, it shall notify not only the Athlete but also his/her National Anti-Doping Organization. If the National Anti-Doping Organization considers that the TUE granted by the IPCA does not meet the criteria set out in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, it has 21 days from such notification to refer the matter to WADA for review in accordance with Article 4.4.6. If the National Anti- Doping Organization refers the matter to WADA for review, the TUE granted by the IPCA remains valid for international-level Competition and Out-of-Competition Testing (but is not valid for national-level Competition) pending WADA’s decision. If the National Anti-Doping Organization does not refer the matter to WADA for review, the TUE granted by the IPCA becomes valid for national-level Competition as well when the 21-day review deadline expires.

[Comment to Article 4.4.2: The IPCA may agree with a National Anti-Doping Organization that the National Anti-Doping Organization will consider TUE applications on behalf of The IPCA.

4.4.3 Athletes who are not included by The IPCA in its Registered Testing Pool and/or who do not participate in an International Event identified by The IPCA must obtain a TUE from their National Anti-Doping Organization or other body designated by their National Federation, as required under the rules of the National Anti-Doping Organization or the National Federation. The application for a TUE must be made as soon as possible (in the case of an Athlete in the Registered Testing Pool, this would be when he/she is first notified of his/her inclusion in the pool) and in any event (save in emergency situations) no later than 30 days before the Athlete’s participation in the Event. National Federations shall promptly report any such TUE to The IPCA, and WADA through ADAMS.

4.4.4 The IPCA shall appoint a panel composed of at least three members to consider requests for TUEs (the “TUE Panel”) in accordance with the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions. The IPCA TUEC may seek other medical or scientific expertise deemed appropriate to review the circumstances of a TUE Application. The decision of the IPCA TUEC shall be notified in writing to the Athlete and WADA.

The TUE Panel member(s) shall promptly evaluate the request in accordance with the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions and render a decision on such request, which, subject to Article 4.4.6 of these Rules, shall be the final decision of the IPCA. The TUE Panel’s decision shall be reported to the Athlete, WADA and other relevant Anti-Doping Organizations, including the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization, through ADAMS.

4.4.5 Expiration, Cancellation, Withdrawal or Reversal of a TUE

4.4.5.1 A TUE granted pursuant to this Code: (a) shall expire automatically at the end of any term for which it was granted, without the need for any further notice or other formality; (b) may be cancelled if the Athlete does not promptly comply with any requirements or conditions imposed by the TUE Committee upon grant of the TUE; (c) may be withdrawn by the TUE Committee if it is subsequently determined that the criteria for grant of a TUE are not in fact met; or (d) may be reversed on review by WADA or on appeal.

4.4.5.2 In such event, the Athlete shall not be subject to any Consequences based on his/her Use or Possession or Administration of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method in question in accordance with the TUE prior to the effective date of expiry, cancellation, withdrawal or reversal of the TUE. The review pursuant to Article 7.2 of any subsequent Adverse Analytical Finding shall include consideration of whether such finding is consistent with Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method prior to that date, in which event no anti-doping rule violation shall be asserted.

4.4.5.3 WADA, at the request of an Athlete or on its own initiative, may review at any time the granting of a TUE to any International-Level Athlete or Athlete entered in an International Event for which a TUE pursuant to the International Federation’s rules is required or national-level Athlete who is included in his or her National Anti-Doping Organization or National Federation ’s Registered Testing Pool. Further, upon any request of any such Athlete who has been denied a TUE, WADA may review such denial. If WADA determines that such granting or denial of a TUE did not comply with the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, WADA may reverse that decision. Decisions on TUEs are subject to further appeal as provided in Article 13.

4.4.6 Reviews and Appeals of TUE Decisions

4.4.6.1 WADA shall review any decision by the IPCA not to recognize a TUE granted by the National Anti-Doping Organization that is referred toWADA by the Athlete or the Athlete’s National Anti- Doping Organization. In addition, WADA shall review any decision by the IPCA to grant a TUE that is referred toWADA by the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization. WADA may review any other TUE decisions at any time, whether upon request by those affected or on its own initiative. If the TUE decision being reviewed meets the criteria set out in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, WADA will not interfere with it. If the TUE decision does not meet those criteria, WADA will reverse it.

4.4.6.2 Any TUE decision by The IPCA (or by a National Anti-Doping Organization where it has agreed to consider the application on behalf of the IPCA that is not reviewed by WADA, or that is reviewed by WADA but is not reversed upon review, may be appealed by the Athlete and/or the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization exclusively to CAS, in accordance with Article 13.

[Comment to Article 4.4.6.2: In such cases, the decision being appealed is the IPCA TUE decision, not WADA’s decision not to review the TUE decision or (having reviewed it) not to reverse the TUE decision. However, the deadline to appeal the TUE decision does not begin to run until the date that WADA communicates its decision. In any event, whether the decision has been reviewed by WADA or not, WADA shall be given notice of the appeal so that it may participate if it sees fit.]

4.4.6.3 A decision by WADA to reverse a TUE decision may be appealed by the Athlete, the National Anti- Doping Organization and/or The IPCA exclusively to CAS, in accordance with Article 13.

4.4.6.4 A failure to take action within a reasonable time on a properly submitted application for grant or recognition of a TUE or for review of a TUE decision shall be considered a denial of the application.

4.4.6.4.1 A failure to take action within a reasonable time on a properly submitted application for grant or recognition of a TUE or for review of a TUE decision shall be considered a denial of the application.

4.4.6.4.2 Where a decision of the IPCA regarding the grant of a TUE pursuant to these rules is reversed on appeal, or where the TUE expires is cancelled or withdrawn, the Athlete shall not be subject to any Consequences based on his/her Use or Possession or Administration of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method in question in accordance with the TUE prior to the effective date of expiry, cancellation, withdrawal or reversal of the TUE.

ARTICLE 5: TESTING AND INVESTIGATIONS

5.1 Purpose of Testing and Investigations

Testing and investigations shall only be undertaken for anti-doping purposes. They shall be conducted in conformity with the provisions of the International Standard for Testing and Investigations and the specific protocols of the IPCA supplementing that International Standard.

5.1.1 Testing shall be undertaken to obtain analytical evidence as to the Athlete’s compliance (or non- compliance) with the strict the Code prohibition on the presence/Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.

5.1.2 Investigations shall be undertaken:

5.1.2.1 in relation to Atypical Findings, Atypical Passport Findings and Adverse Passport Findings, in accordance with Articles 7.4 and 7.5 respectively, gathering intelligence or evidence (including, in particular, analytical evidence) in order to determine whether an anti-doping rule violation has occurred under Article 2.1 and/or Article 2.2; and

5.1.2.2 in relation to other indications of potential anti-doping rule violations, in accordance with Articles 7.6 and 7.7, gathering intelligence or evidence (including, in particular, non-analytical evidence) in order to determine whether an anti-doping rule violation has occurred under any of Articles 2.2 to 2.10.

5.2 Authority to conduct Testing

5.2.1 Subject to the jurisdictional limitations for Event Testing set out in Article 5.3 of the Code, the IPCA shall have In-Competition and Out-of-Competition Testing authority over all of the Athletes specified in the Introduction to the Code (under the heading “Scope”).

5.2.2 In addition, all Athletes under the jurisdiction of a National Federation shall be subject to Testing by the IPCA, the Athlete’s National Federation, and any other Anti-Doping Organization responsible for Testing at a Competition or Event in which they participate. All Athletes under the jurisdiction of a National Federation, including Athletes serving a period of Ineligibility or a Provisional Suspension, shall be subject to Testing at any time or place, In-Competition or Out-of-Competition by the IPCA, the Athlete’s National Federation, the National Anti-Doping Organization of any country where the Athlete is present or of which the Athlete is national, resident, license-holder or member of a sport organization, the IPC in connection with Paralympic Games, and any other Anti-Doping Organization responsible for Testing at a Competition or Event in which they participate.

All Athletes must comply with any request for Testing by any Anti-Doping Organization with Testing jurisdiction.

[Comment to Articles 5.2.1 and 5.2.2: Unless the Athlete has identified a 60-minute time-slot for Testing between the hours of 11pm and 6am, or has otherwise consented to Testing during that period, the IPCA will not test an Athlete during that period unless it has a serious and specific suspicion that the Athlete may be engaged in doping. A challenge to whether the IPCA had sufficient suspicion for Testing in that period shall not be a defense to an anti-doping rule violation based on such test or attempted test.]

5.2.3 WADA shall have In-Competition and Out-of-Competition Testing authority as set out in Article 20.7.8 of the Code.

5.2.4 If the IPCA delegates or contracts any part of Testing to a National Anti-Doping Organization (directly or through a National Federation), that National Anti-Doping Organization may collect additional Samples or direct the laboratory to perform additional types of analysis at the National Anti-Doping Organization’s expense. If additional Samples are collected or additional types of analysis are performed, the IPCA shall be notified.

5.3 Test Distribution Plan

Consistent with the International Standard for Testing and Investigations, and in coordination with other Anti- Doping Organizations conducting Testing on the same Athletes, the IPCA shall develop and implement an effective, intelligent and proportionate test distribution plan that prioritizes appropriately between disciplines, categories of Athletes, types of Testing, types of Samples collected, and types of Sample analysis, all in compliance with the requirements of the International Standard for Testing and Investigations. The IPCA shall provide WADA upon request with a copy of its current test distribution plan.

5.4 Standards for Testing

Testing conducted by the IPCA and its National Federations shall be in substantial conformity with the International Standard for Testing and Investigations in force at the time of Testing.

5.4.1 Blood (or other non-urine) Samples may be used to detect Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods, for screening procedure purposes, or for longitudinal hematological profiling (“the passport”).

5.5 Coordination of Testing

5.5.1 Event Testing

The collection of Samples for Doping Control shall take place at both International Events and National Events. However, except as otherwise provided below, only a single organization should be responsible for initiating and directing Testing at Event Venues during the Event Period. At International Events, the collection of Doping Control Samples shall be initiated the IPCA (or any other international organization which is the ruling body for the Event (e.g., the IPCA World Chess Championsips). At National Events, the collection of Doping Control Samples shall be initiated and directed by the designated National Anti-Doping Organization or National Federation of that country. At the request of the IPCA (or any other international organization which is the ruling body for an Event), any Testing during the Event Period outside of the Event Venues shall be coordinated with the IPCA (or the relevant ruling body of the Event).

5.5.1.1 If an Anti-Doping Organization which would otherwise have Testing authority but is not responsible for initiating and directing Testing at an Event desires to conduct Testing of Athletes at the Event Venues during the Event Period, the Anti-Doping Organization shall first confer with the IPCA (or any other international organization which is the ruling body of the Event) to obtain permission to conduct and coordinate such Testing. If the Anti-Doping Organization is not satisfied with the response from the IPCA or the ruling body of the Event, the Anti-Doping Organization may ask WADA for permission to conduct additional Testing and to determine how to coordinate such Testing, in accordance with the procedures set out in the International Standard for Testing and Investigations. WADA shall not grant approval for such Testing before consulting with and informing the IPCA (or any other international organization which is the ruling body for the Event). WADA’s decision shall be final and not subject to appeal. Unless otherwise provided in the authorization to conduct Testing, such tests shall be considered Out-of- Competition tests. Results management for any such test shall be the responsibility of the Anti-Doping Organization initiating the test unless provided otherwise in the rules of the ruling body of the Event.

[Comment to Article 5.5.1.1: Before giving approval to a National Anti-Doping Organization to initiate and conduct Testing at an International Event, WADA shall consult with the international organization which is the ruling body for the Event. Before giving approval to an International Federation to initiate and conduct Testing at a National Event, WADA shall consult with the National Anti-Doping Organization of the country where the Event takes place. The Anti-Doping Organization “initiating and directing Testing” may, if it chooses, enter into agreements with other organizations to which it delegates responsibility for Sample collection or other aspects of the Doping Control process.]

5.5.2 Coordination of Testing

Where reasonably feasible, Testing shall be coordinated through ADAMS or another system approved by WADA in order to maximize the effectiveness of the combined Testing effort and to avoid unnecessary repetitive Testing.

5.6 Athlete Whereabouts Requirements

5.6.1 The IPCA shall identify a Registered Testing Pool of those Athletes who are required to comply with the whereabouts requirements of Annex 1 to the International Standard for Testing, and shall make available through ADAMS, a list which identifies those Athletes included in its Registered Testing Pool either by name or by clearly defined, specific criteria. The IPCA shall coordinate with National Anti-Doping Organizations the identification of such Athletes and the collection of their whereabouts information. The IPCA shall review and update as necessary its criteria for including Athletes in its Registered Testing Pool, and shall revise the membership of its Registered Testing Pool from time to time as appropriate in accordance with the set criteria. Athletes shall be notified before they are included in a Registered Testing Pool and when they are removed from that pool. Each Athlete in the Registered Testing Pool (a) shall advise the IPCA of his/her whereabouts on a quarterly basis, in accordance with Annex 1 to the International Standard for Testing; (b) shall update that information as necessary so that it remains accurate and complete at all times; and (c) shall make him/herself available for Testing at such whereabouts.

5.6.2 An Athlete’s failure to comply with the requirements of the International Standard for Testing and Investigations the IPCA shall be deemed a filing failure or a missed test (as defined in the International Standard for Testing and Investigations) where the conditions set forth in the International Standard for Testing and Investigations for declaring a filing failure or missed test are met.

5.6.3 An Athlete in the IPCA’s Registered Testing Pool shall continue to be subject to the obligation to comply with the whereabouts requirements of Annex I to the International Standard for Testing and Investigations unless and until (a) the Athlete gives written notice to the IPCA that he/she has retired or (b) the IPCA has informed him or her that he/she no longer satisfies the criteria for inclusion in the IPCA’s Registered Testing Pool.

5.6.4 Each National Federation shall also assist its National Anti-Doping Organization in establishing a national level Registered Testing Pool of top level national Athletes to whom the whereabouts requirements of the International Standard for Testing shall also apply. Where those Athletes are also in the IPCA’s Registered Testing Pool , the IPCA and the National Anti-Doping Organization will agree (with the assistance of WADA if required) on which of them will take responsibility for receiving whereabouts filings from the Athlete and sharing it with the other (and with other Anti-Doping Organizations) in accordance with Article 5.6.5.

5.6.5 Whereabouts information provided pursuant to Articles 5.6.1 and 5.6.4 shall be shared (through ADAMS) with WADA and other Anti-Doping Organizations having jurisdiction to test an Athlete, shall be maintained in strict confidence at all times, shall be used exclusively for the purposes set out in Article 5.6 of the Code, and shall be destroyed in accordance with the International Standard for the Protection of Privacy and Personal Information once it is no longer relevant for these purposes.

5.7 Retirement and Return to Competition

5.7.1 An Athlete in the IPCA’s Registered Testing Pool who has given notice of retirement to the IPCA may not resume competing in International Events or National Events until he/she has given the IPCA written notice of his/her intent to resume competing and has made him/herself available for Testing for a period of six months before returning to Competition, including (if requested) complying with the whereabouts requirements of Annex I to the International Standard for Testing and Investigations. WADA, in consultation with the IPCA and the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization, may grant an exemption to the six-month written notice rule where the strict application of that rule would be manifestly unfair to an Athlete. This decision may be appealed under Article 13. Any competitive results obtained in violation of this Article 5.7.1 shall be Disqualified.

5.7.2 If an Athlete retires from sport while subject to a period of Ineligibility, the Athlete shall not resume competing in International Events or National Events until the Athlete has given six months prior written notice (or notice equivalent to the period of Ineligibility remaining as of the date the Athlete retired, if that period was longer than six months) to the IPCA and to his/her National Anti-Doping Organization of his/her intent to resume competing and has made him/herself available for Testing for that notice period, including (if requested) complying with the whereabouts requirements of Annex I to the International Standard for Testing and Investigations.

5.8 Independent Observer Program

The IPCA and the organizing committees for the IPCA Events, as well as the National Federations and the organizing committees for National Federation Events shall provide access to independent observers at Events in accordance with the Independent Observers Program at such Events

ARTICLE 6: ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES

Doping Control Samples collected under this Code shall be analyzed in accordance with the following principles:

6.1 Use of Approved Laboratories

For purposes of Article 2.1 (Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an Athlete’s Sample), the IPCA or its National Federations shall send Samples for analysis only to WADA- accredited laboratory (or other laboratory or method approved by WADA) The choice of the WADA-accredited or WADA-approved laboratory used for the Sample analysis shall be determined exclusively by the IPCA or its National Federations.

[Comment to Article 6.1: Violations of Article 2.1 (Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers) may be established only by Sample analysis performed by a WADA-approved laboratory or another laboratory specifically authorized by WADA. Violations of other Articles may be established using analytical results from other laboratories so long as the results are reliable.]

6.2 Purpose of Collection and Analysis of Samples

6.2.1 Samples shall be analysed to detect Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods identified on the Prohibited List and other substances as may be directed by WADA pursuant to the Monitoring Program described in Article 4.5 of the Code; or to assist the IPCA or its National Federations in profiling relevant parameters in an Athlete’s urine, blood or other matrix, including DNA or genomic profiling; or for any other legitimate anti-doping purpose. Samples may be collected and stored for future analysis.

[Comment to Article 6.2: For example, relevant profile information could be used to direct Target Testing or to support an anti-doping rule violation proceeding under Article 2.2 (Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance), or both.

6.3 Research on Samples

No Sample may be used for any purpose other than as described in Article 6.2 without the Athlete’s written consent. Samples used for purposes other than Article 6.2 shall have any means of identification removed such that they cannot be traced back to a particular Athlete.

6.4 Standards for Sample Analysis and Reporting

Laboratories shall analyse Samples and report results in conformity with the International Standard for Laboratories. To ensure effective Testing, the Technical Document referenced at Article 5.4.1 of the Code will establish risk assessment-based Sample analysis menus appropriate for particular sports and sport disciplines, and laboratories shall analyze Samples in conformity with those menus, except as follows:

6.4.1 The IPCA may request that laboratories analyze their Samples using more extensive menus than those described in the Technical Document.

6.4.2 The IPCA may request that laboratories analyze their Samples using less extensive menus than those described in the Technical Document only if they have satisfied WADA that, because of the particular circumstances of their country or sport, as set out in their test distribution plan, less extensive analysis would be appropriate.

6.4.3 As provided in the International Standard for Laboratories, laboratories at their own initiative and expense may analyze Samples for Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods not included on the Sample analysis menu described in the Technical Document or specified by the Testing authority. Results from any such analysis shall be reported and have the same validity and consequence as any other analytical result.

[Comment to Article 6.4: The objective of this Article is to extend the principle of “intelligent Testing” to the Sample analysis menu so as to most effectively and efficiently detect doping. It is recognized that the resources available to fight doping are limited and that increasing the Sample analysis menu may, in some sports and countries, reduce the number of Samples which can be analyzed.]

6.5 ReTesting Samples

Any Sample may be stored and subsequently subjected to further analysis for the purposes set out in Article 6.2: (a) by WADA at any time; and/or (b) by the IPCA at any time before both the A and B Sample analytical results (or A Sample result where B Sample analysis has been waived or will not be performed) have been communicated by the IPCA to the Athlete as the asserted basis for an Article 2.1 anti- doping rule violation. Such further analysis of Samples shall conform with the requirements of the International Standard for Laboratories and the International Standard for Testing and Investigations.

ARTICLE 7: RESULTS MANAGEMENT

7.1 Responsibility for conducting Results Management

The circumstances in which the IPCA shall take responsibility for conducting results management in respect of anti-doping rule violations involving Athletes and other Persons under its jurisdiction shall be determined by reference to and in accordance with Article 7 of the Code.

Results management for tests initiated by The IPCA (including tests performed by WADA pursuant to agreement with The IPCA) shall proceed as set forth below:

7.1.1 The results from all analyses must be sent to The IPCA in encoded form, in a report signed by an authorized representative of the laboratory. All communication must be conducted in confidentiality and in conformity with ADAMS, a database management tool developed by WADA. ADAMS is consistent with data privacy statutes and norms applicable to WADA and other organizations using it.

7.1.2 The IPCA shall appoint a Doping Review Panel consisting of a Chair and [2] other members with experience in anti-doping. Each panel member shall serve a term of four years. When a potential violation is referred to the Doping Review Panel by the IPCA, the Chair of the Doping Review Panel shall appoint one or more members of the Panel (which may include the Chair) to conduct the review discussed in this Article 7.

7.1.3 Upon receipt of an A Sample Adverse Analytical Finding, The IPCA shall conduct an initial review to determine whether: (a) an applicable TUE has been granted or will be granted as provided in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, or (b) there is any apparent departure from the International Standard for Testing and Investigations or International Standard for Laboratories that caused the Adverse Analytical Finding.

7.1.4 If the review of an Adverse Analytical Finding under Article 7.1.3 reveals an applicable TUE or departure from the International Standard for Testing and Investigations or the International Standard for Laboratories that caused the Adverse Analytical Finding, the entire test shall be considered negative and the Athlete, the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization and WADA shall be so informed.

7.1.5 If the initial review of an Adverse Analytical Finding under Article 7.1.3 does not reveal an applicable TUE or entitlement to a TUE as provided in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, or departure from the International Standard for Laboratories that caused the Adverse Analytical Finding, the IPCA shall promptly notify the Athlete, in the manner set out in Article 14.1, of: (a) the Adverse Analytical Finding; (b) the anti-doping rule violated; (c) the Athlete’s right to promptly request the analysis of the B Sample or, failing such request, that the B Sample analysis may be deemed waived; (d) the scheduled date, time and place for the B Sample analysis if the Athlete or the IPCA chooses to request an analysis of the B Sample; (e) the opportunity for the Athlete and/or the Athlete’s representative to attend the B Sample opening and analysis within the time period specified in the International Standard for Laboratories if such analysis is requested; and (f) the Athlete’s right to request copies of the A and B Sample laboratory documentation package which includes information as required by the International Standard for Laboratories. The IPCA shall also notify the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization and WADA. If The IPCA decides not to bring forward the Adverse Analytical Finding as an anti-doping rule violation, it shall so notify the Athlete, the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization and WADA.

7.1.6 Where requested by the Athlete or the IPCA, arrangements shall be made to analyse the B Sample within the time period specified in the International Standard for Laboratories. An Athlete may accept the A Sample analytical results by waiving the requirement for B Sample analysis. The IPCA may nonetheless elect to proceed with the B Sample analysis.

7.1.7 The Athlete and/or his or her representative shall be allowed to be present at the analysis of the B Sample within the time period specified in the International Standard for Laboratories. Also, a representative of the Athlete’s National Federation as well as a representative of the IPCA shall be allowed to be present.

7.1.8 If the B Sample proves negative, then (unless the IPCA takes the case forward as an anti- doping rule violation under Article 2.2) the entire test shall be considered negative and the Athlete, his or her National Federation, and the IPCA shall be so informed.

7.1.9 If a Prohibited Substance or the Use of a Prohibited Method is identified, the findings shall be reported to the Athlete, his or her National Federation, the IPCA, and to WADA.

7.1.10 The IPCA shall conduct any follow-up investigation into a possible anti-doping rule violation not covered by Articles 7.1.1 to 7.1.9. At such time as the IPCA is satisfied that an anti- doping rule violation has occurred, it shall promptly give the Athlete or other Person subject to sanction notice in the manner set out in Article 14.1, of the anti-doping rule violated, and the basis of the violation. The IPCA shall also notify the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization and WADA as provided in Article 14.1.2 of the WADC.

7.2 Provisional Suspensions

7.2.1 Mandatory Provisional Suspension: If analysis of an A Sample has resulted in an Adverse Analytical Finding for a Prohibited Substance that is not a Specified Substance, or for a Prohibited Method, and a review in accordance with Article 7.1.3 does not reveal an applicable TUE or departure from the International Standard for Testing and Investigations or the International Standard for Laboratories that caused the Adverse Analytical Finding, a Provisional Suspension shall be imposed upon or promptly after the notification described in Articles 7.1.4, 7.1.5, and 7.4.

A mandatory Provisional Suspension may be eliminated if the Athlete demonstrates to the hearing panel that the violation is likely to have involved a Contaminated Product. A hearing body’s decision not to eliminate a mandatory Provisional Suspension on account of the Athlete’s assertion regarding a Contaminated Product shall not be appealable.

Provided, however, that a Provisional Suspension may not be imposed unless the Athlete is given either: (a) an opportunity for a Provisional Hearing, either before imposition of the Provisional Suspension or on a timely basis after imposition of the Provisional Suspension; or (b) an opportunity for an expedited hearing in accordance with Article 8 on a timely basis after imposition of a Provisional Suspension.

7.3 Review of Atypical Findings

7.3.1 As provided in the International Standards, in some circumstances laboratories are directed to report the presence of Prohibited Substances, which may also be produced endogenously, as Atypical Findings subject to further investigation, i.e., as findings that are subject to further investigation. .

7.3.2 Upon receipt of an A Sample Atypical Finding, the IPCA shall conduct a review to determine whether: (a) an applicable Therapeutic Use Exemption has been granted or; (b) there is any apparent departure from the International Standard for Testing and Investigations or International Standard for Laboratories that caused the Atypical Finding.

7.3.3 If the initial review of an Atypical Finding under Article 7.3.2 reveals an applicable TUE or departure from the International Standard for Testing or the International Standard for Laboratories that caused the Atypical Finding, the entire test shall be considered negative and the Athlete, the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization, and WADA shall be so informed.

7.3.4 If that initial review does not reveal an applicable TUE or a departure from the International Standard for Testing and Investigations or the International Standard for Laboratories that caused the Atypical Finding, the IPCA shall conduct the required investigation or cause it to be conducted. After the investigation is completed, the Athlete, WADA and the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization shall be notified whether or not the Atypical Finding will be brought forward as an Adverse Analytical Finding in accordance with Article 7.1.5.

7.3.5 The IPCA will not provide notice of an Atypical Finding until it has completed its investigation and has decided whether it will bring the Atypical Finding forward as an Adverse Analytical Finding unless one of the following circumstances exists:

(a) If the IPCA determines the B Sample should be analysed prior to the conclusion of its follow- up investigation, it may conduct the B Sample analysis after notifying the Athlete, with such notice to include a description of the Atypical Finding and the information described in Article 7.1.5(b) to (f).

(b) If the IPCA receives a request, either from a Major Event Organization shortly before one of its International Events or a request from a sport organization responsible for meeting an imminent deadline for selecting team members for an International Event, to disclose whether any Athlete identified on a list provided by the Major Event Organization or sport organization has a pending Atypical Finding, the IPCA Presidential Board shall so identify any such Athlete after first providing notice of the Atypical Finding to the Athlete.

7.4 Review of Atypical Passport Findings and Adverse Passport Findings

Review of Atypical Passport Findings and Adverse Passport Findings shall take place as provided in the International Standard for Testing and Investigations and International Standard for Laboratories. At such time as the IPCA is satisfied that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred, it shall promptly give the Athlete (and simultaneously the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization and WADA) notice of the anti-doping rule violation asserted and the basis of that assertion.

7.5 Results Management for Tests initiated by National Federations

Results management conducted by National Federations shall be consistent with the general principles for effective and fair results management which are underlined in the detailed provisions set forth in this Article 7. Adverse Analytical findings, Atypical Findings and other asserted violations of the Code shall be reported by National Federations in accordance with the principles outlined in this Article 7 to the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization, The IPCA and WADA no later than the completion of the National Federation’s results management process. Any apparent anti-doping rule violation by an Athlete who is a member of that National Federation shall be promptly referred to an appropriate hearing panel established pursuant to the rules of the National Federation, National Anti-Doping Organization or national law. Apparent anti-doping rule violations by Athletes who are members of another National Federation shall be referred to the IPCA for hearing.

7.6 Results Management for Whereabouts Violations

The IPCA shall review potential filing failures and missed tests, as defined in the International Standard for Testing and Investigations, in respect of Athletes who file their whereabouts information with the IPCA, in accordance with Annex I to the International Standard for Testing and Investigations. At such time as the IPCA is satisfied that an Article 2.4 anti-doping rule violation has occurred, it shall promptly give the Athlete (and simultaneously the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization and WADA) notice that it is asserting a violation of Article 2.4 and the basis of that assertion.

7.7 Retirement from Sport

If an Athlete or other Person retires while a results management process is underway, the IPCA or its National Federations conducting the results management process retains jurisdiction to complete its results management process. If an Athlete or other Person retires before any results management process has begun and the IPCA or its National Federations would have had results management jurisdiction over the Athlete or other Person at the time the Athlete or other Person committed an anti-doping rule violation, the IPCA or its National Federations have jurisdiction to conduct results management.

[Comment to Article 7.7: Conduct by an Athlete or other Person before the Athlete or other Person was subject to the jurisdiction of any Anti-Doping Organization would not constitute an Anti-Doping Rule Violation but could be a legitimate basis for denying the Athlete or other Person membership in a Sports Organization.]

7.8 Identification of Prior Anti-Doping Rule Violations

Before giving an Athlete or other Person notice of an asserted anti-doping rule violation as provided above, the IPCA shall refer to ADAMS and contact WADA and other relevant Anti-Doping Organizations to determine whether any prior anti-doping rule violation exists.

7.9 Notification of Results Management Decisions

In all cases where the IPCA has asserted the commission of an anti-doping rule violation, withdrawn the assertion of an anti-doping rule violation, imposed a Provisional Suspension, or agreed with an Athlete or other Person on the imposition of Consequences without a hearing, the IPCA shall give notice thereof in accordance with Article 14.2.1 of the WADC to other Anti-Doping Organizations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3 of the WADC.

ARTICLE 8: RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING

8.1 Hearings following The IPCA result management

8.1.1 When the IPCA sends a notice to an Athlete or other Person asserting an anti-doping rule violation, and the Athlete or other Person does not waive a hearing in accordance with Article 8.1.6, then the case shall be assigned to the IPCA Doping Hearing Panel, for adjudication.

8.1.2 Hearings pursuant to this Article shall be completed expeditiously following the completion of the results management process described in Article 7. Hearings held in connection with Events may be conducted on an expedited basis. If the Athlete has been imposed a Provisional Suspension as per Article 7.6, the Athlete has the right to request that the hearing be conducted on an expedited basis.

[Comment to Article 8.1.2: For example, a hearing could be expedited on the eve of a major Event where the resolution of the anti-doping rule violation is necessary to determine the Athlete’s eligibility to participate in the Event or during an Event where the resolution of the case will affect the validity of the Athlete’s results or continued participation in the Event.]

8.1.3 WADA and the National Federation of the Athlete or other Person alleged to have violated these Anti- Doping Rules may attend the hearing as an observer.

8.1.4 The IPCA shall keep WADA fully apprised as to the status of pending cases and the result of all hearings.

8.1.5 An Athlete or other Person may forego a hearing by acknowledging the Anti-Doping Rule violation and accepting Consequences consistent with Articles 9 and 10 as proposed by the IPCA. The right to a hearing may be waived either expressly or by the Athlete’s or other Person’s failure to challenge the IPCA assertion that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred within a reasonable period of time. Where no hearing occurs, the IF shall submit to the Persons described in Article 13.2.3 a reasoned decision explaining the action taken.

8.1.6 The IPCA Doping Hearing Panel shall act in a fair and impartial manner towards all parties at all times.

8.1.7 At the end of the hearing, or on a timely basis thereafter, the IPCA Doping Hearing Panel shall issue a written decision that includes the full reasons for the decision and for any period of Ineligibility imposed, including (if applicable) a justification for why the greatest potential Consequences were not imposed.

8.1.8 Decisions of the IPCA Doping Hearing Panel, may be appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport as provided in Article 13. Copies of the decision shall be provided to the Athlete or other Person and to other Anti-Doping Organizations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3.

8.1.9 If no appeal is brought against the decision, then (a) if the decision is that an anti-doping rule violation was committed, the decision shall be Publicly Disclosed as provided in Article 14.3.2 of the WADC; but (b) if the decision is that no anti-doping rule violation was committed, then the decision shall only be Publicly Disclosed with the consent of the Athlete or other Person who is the subject of the decision. The IPCA shall use reasonable efforts to obtain such consent, and if consent is obtained, shall Publicly Disclose the decision in its entirety or in such redacted form as the Athlete or other Person may approve.

The principles contained at Article 14.3.6 of the WADC shall be applied in cases involving a Minor.

8.2 Hearings following National Federations result management

8.2.1 When it appears, following the Results Management process performed by National Federations in accordance with Article 7, that the Code have been violated in connection, the Athlete or other Person involved shall be brought before a disciplinary panel of the Athlete or other Person’s National Federation or National Anti-Doping Organization in accordance with the rules of the National Federation or the National Anti-Doping Organization for a hearing to adjudicate whether a violation of these Anti-Doping Rules occurred and if so what Consequences should be imposed.

8.2.2 Hearings pursuant to this Article 8.2 shall be completed expeditiously and in all cases within three months of the completion of the Results Management process described in Article 7. Hearings held in connection with Events may be conducted by an expedited process. If the Athlete has been imposed a Provisional Suspension as per Article 7.2, the Athlete has the right to request that the hearing be conducted on an expedited basis. If the completion of the hearing is delayed beyond three months, the IPCA may elect to bring the case directly before the IPCA Doping Hearing Panel at the responsibility and at the expense of the National Federation or National Anti-Doping Organization.

8.2.3 National Federations or National Anti-Doping Organizations shall keep the IPCA and WADA fully apprised as to the status of pending cases and the results of all hearings.

8.2.4 The IPCA and WADA shall have the right to attend hearings as an observer.

8.2.5 The Athlete or other Person may forego a hearing by acknowledging the violation of the Code and accepting Consequences consistent with Articles 9 and 10 as proposed by the National Federation. The right to a hearing may be waived either expressly or by the Athlete’s or other Person’s failure to challenge the National Federation’s assertion that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred within a reasonable period of time. Where no hearing occurs, the National Federation shall submit to the Persons described in Article 13.2.3 a reasoned decision explaining the action taken.

8.2.6 Decisions by National Federations or National Anti-Doping Organizations, whether as the result of a hearing or the Athlete or other Person’s acceptance of Consequences, may be appealed as provided in Article 13.

8.3 Principles for a Fair Hearing

All hearings pursuant to either Article 8.1 or 8.2 shall respect the following principles:

– a timely hearing;

– fair and impartial hearing panel;

– the right to be represented by counsel at the Person’s own expense;

– the right to be informed in a fair and timely manner of the asserted anti-doping rule violation;

– the right to respond to the asserted anti-doping rule violation and resulting Consequences;

– the right of each party to present evidence, including the right to call and question witnesses (subject to the hearing panel’s discretion to accept testimony by telephone or written submission);

– the Person’s right to an interpreter at the hearing, with the hearing panel to determine the identity, and responsibility for the cost of the interpreter; and

– a timely, written, reasoned decision, specifically including an explanation of the reason(s) for any period of Ineligibility.]

ARTICLE 9: AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFICATION OF INDIVIDUAL RESULTS

An Anti-Doping Rule Violation in Individual Sports in connection with an In Competition test automatically leads to Disqualification of the result obtained in that Competition with all resulting Consequences, including forfeiture of any medals, points and prizes.

[Comment to Article 9: For Team Sports, any awards received by individual players will be Disqualified. besides the awards received by individual players the personal board, if the Regulation of Competition provides such awards. However, Disqualification of the team will be as provided in Article 11. In sports, which are not Team Sports but where awards are given to teams, Disqualification or other disciplinary action against the team when one or more team members have committed an anti-doping rule violation shall be as provided in the applicable rules of the International Federation.]

ARTICLE 10: SANCTIONS ON INDIVIDUALS

10.1 Disqualification of Results in IPCA Sanctioned Events

An Anti-Doping Rule Violation occurring during or in connection with an Event may, upon the decision of the ruling body of the Event, lead to Disqualification of all of the Athlete’s individual results obtained in that Event with all Consequences, including forfeiture of all medals, points and prizes, except as provided in Article 10.1.1.

Factors to be included in considering whether to disqualify other results in an Event might include, for example, the severity of the Athlete’s Anti-Doping Rule Violation and whether the Athlete tested negative in the other Competitions

[Comment to Article 10.1: Whereas Article 9 disqualifies the result in a single Competition in which the Athlete tested positive (e.g., Teams), this Article may lead to Disqualification of all results in all the games during the Event (e.g., the IPCA World Chess Championsips).]

10.1.1 If the Athlete establishes that he or she bears No Fault or Negligence for the violation, the Athlete’s individual results in the other Competitions shall not be Disqualified unless the Athlete’s results in Competitions other than the Competition in which the Anti-Doping Rule Violation occurred were likely to have been affected by the Athlete’s Anti-Doping Rule Violation.

10.2 Ineligibility for Presence, Use or Attempted Use, or Possession of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method

The period of Ineligibility for a violation of Articles 2.1, 2.2 or 2.6 shall be as follows, subject to potential reduction or suspension pursuant to Articles 10.4, 10.5 or 10.6:

10.2.1 The period of Ineligibility shall be four years where:

10.2.1.1 The anti-doping rule violation does not involve a Specified Substance, unless the Athlete or other Person can establish that the anti-doping rule violation was not intentional.

10.2.1.2 The anti-doping rule violation involves a Specified Substance and the IPCA can establish that the anti-doping rule violation was intentional.

10.2.2 If Article 10.2.1 does not apply, the period of Ineligibility shall be two years.

10.2.3 As used in Articles 10.2 and 10.3, the term “intentional” is meant to identify those Athletes who cheat. The term therefore requires that the Athlete or other Person engaged in conduct which he or she knew constituted an anti-doping rule violation or knew that there was a significant risk that the conduct might constitute or result in an anti-doping rule violation and manifestly disregarded that risk. An anti-doping rule violation resulting from an Adverse Analytical Finding for a substance which is only prohibited In-Competition shall be rebuttably presumed to be not intentional if the substance is a Specified Substance and the Athlete can establish that the Prohibited Substance was UsedOut- of-Competition. An anti-doping rule violation resulting from an Adverse Analytical Finding for a substance which is only prohibited In-Competition shall not be considered intentional if the substance is not a Specified Substance and the Athlete can establish that the Prohibited Substance was UsedOut-of-Competition in a context unrelated to sport performance.

10.3 Ineligibility for Other Anti-Doping Rule Violations

The period of Ineligibility for anti-doping rule violations other than as provided in Article 10.2 shall be as follows, unless Articles 10.5 or 10.6 are applicable:

10.3.1 For violations of Article 2.3 or Article 2.5, the period of Ineligibility shall be four years unless, in the case of failing to submit to Sample collection, the Athlete can establish that the commission of the anti-doping rule violation was not intentional (as defined in Article 10.2.3), in which case the period of Ineligibility shall be two years.

10.3.2 For violations of Article 2.4, the period of Ineligibility shall be two years, subject to reduction down to a minimum of one year, depending on the Athlete’s degree of Fault. The flexibility between two years and one year of Ineligibility in this Article is not available to Athletes where a pattern of last-minute whereabouts changes or other conduct raises a serious suspicion that the Athlete was trying to avoid being available for Testing.

10.3.3 For violations of Article 2.7 or 2.8, the period of Ineligibility shall be a minimum of four years up to lifetime Ineligibility, depending on the seriousness of the violation. An Article 2.7 or Article 2.8 violation involving a Minor shall be considered a particularly serious violation and, if committed by Athlete Support Personnel for violations other than for Specified Substances, shall result in lifetime Ineligibility for Athlete Support Personnel. In addition, significant violations of Article 2.7 or 2.8 which may also violate non-sporting laws and regulations, shall be reported to the competent administrative, professional or judicial authorities.

[Comment to Article 10.3.3: Those who are involved in doping Athletes or covering up doping should be subject to sanctions which are more severe than the Athletes who test positive. Since the authority of sport organizations is generally limited to Ineligibility for accreditation, membership and other sport benefits, reporting Athlete Support Personnel to competent authorities is an important step in the deterrence of doping.]

10.3.4 For violations of Article 2.9, the period of Ineligibility imposed shall be a minimum of two years, up to four years, depending on the seriousness of the violation.

10.3.5 For violations of Article 2.10, the period of Ineligibility shall be two years, subject to reduction down to a minimum of one year, depending on the Athlete or other Person’s degree of Fault and other circumstances of the case.

[Comment to Article 10.3.5: Where the “other Person” referenced in Article 2.10 is an entity and not an individual, that entity may be disciplined as provided in Article 12.]

10.4 Elimination of the Period of Ineligibility where there is No Fault or Negligence

If an Athlete or other Person establishes in an individual case that he or she bears No Fault or Negligence, then the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility shall be eliminated.

[Comment to Article 10.4: This Article and Article 10.5.2 apply only to the imposition of sanctions; they are not applicable to the determination of whether an anti-doping rule violation has occurred. They will only apply in exceptional circumstances, for example where an Athlete could prove that, despite all due care, he or she was sabotaged by a competitor. Conversely, No Fault or Negligence would not apply in the following circumstances: (a) a positive test resulting from a mislabeled or contaminated vitamin or nutritional supplement (Athletes are responsible for what they ingest (Article 2.1.1) and have been warned against the possibility of supplement contamination); (b) the Administration of a Prohibited Substance by the Athlete’s personal physician or trainer without disclosure to the Athlete (Athletes are responsible for their choice of medical personnel and for advising medical personnel that they cannot be given any Prohibited Substance); and (c) sabotage of the Athlete’s food or drink by a spouse, coach or other Person within the Athlete’s circle of associates (Athletes are responsible for what they ingest and for the conduct of those Persons to whom they entrust access to their food and drink). However, depending on the unique facts of a particular case, any of the referenced illustrations could result in a reduced sanction under Article 10.5 based on No Significant Fault or Negligence.]

10.5 Reduction of the Period of Ineligibility based on No Significant Fault or Negligence

10.5.1 Reduction of Sanctions for Specified Substances or Contaminated Products for Violations of Article 2.1, 2.2 or 2.6.

10.5.1.1 Specified Substances

Where the anti-doping rule violation involves a Specified Substance, and the Athlete or other Person can establish No Significant Fault or Negligence, then the period of Ineligibility shall be, at a minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility, and at a maximum, two years of Ineligibility, depending on the Athlete’s or other Person’s degree of Fault.

10.5.1.2 Contaminated Products

In cases where the Athlete or other Person can establish No Significant Fault or Negligence and that the detected Prohibited Substance came from a Contaminated Product, then the period of Ineligibility shall be, at a minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility, and at a maximum, two years Ineligibility, depending on the Athlete’s or other Person’s degree of Fault.

[Comment to Article 10.5.1.2: In assessing that Athlete’s degree of Fault, it would, for example, be favorable for the Athlete if the Athlete had declared the product which was subsequently determined to be contaminated on his or her Doping Control form.]

10.5.2 Application of No Significant Fault or Negligence beyond the Application of Article 10.5.1

If an Athlete or other Person establishes in an individual case where Article 10.5.1 is not applicable that he or she bears No Significant Fault or Negligence, then, subject to further reduction or elimination as provided in Article 10.6, the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be reduced based on the Athlete or other Person’s degree of Fault, but the reduced period of Ineligibility may not be less than one-half of the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable. If the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility is a lifetime, the reduced period under this Article may be no less than eight years.

[Comment to Article 10.5.2: Article 10.5.2 may be applied to any anti-doping rule violation except those Articles where intent is an element of the anti-doping rule violation (e.g., Article 2.5, 2.7, 2.8 or 2.9) or an element of a particular sanction (e.g., Article 10.2.1) or a range of Ineligibility is already provided in an Article based on the Athlete or other Person’s degree of Fault.]

10.6 Elimination, Reduction, or Suspension of Period of Ineligibility or other Consequences for Reasons Other than Fault

10.6.1 Substantial Assistance in Discovering or Establishing Anti-Doping Rule Violations

10.6.1.1 The IPCA may, prior to a final appellate decision under Article 13 or the expiration of the time to appeal, suspend a part of the period of Ineligibility imposed in an individual case in which it has results management authority where the Athlete or other Person has provided Substantial Assistance to an Anti-Doping Organization, criminal authority or professional disciplinary body which results in: (i) the Anti- Doping Organization discovering or bringing forward an anti-doping rule violation by another Person, or(ii) which results in a criminal or disciplinary body discovering or bringing forward acriminal offense or the breach of professional rules committed by another Personand theinformation provided by the Person providing Substantial Assistance is made availableto the IPCA. After a final appellate decision under Article 13 or the expiration of time to appeal, the IPCA may only suspend a part of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility with the approval of WADA. The extent to which the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be suspended shall be based on the seriousness of the anti-doping rule violation committed by the Athlete or other Person and the significance of the Substantial Assistance provided by the Athlete or other Person to the effort to eliminate doping in sport. No more than three-quarters of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be suspended. If the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility is a lifetime, the non-suspended period under this Article must be no less than eight years. If the Athlete or other Person fails to continue to cooperate and to provide the complete and credible Substantial Assistance upon which a suspension of the period of Ineligibility was based, the IPCA shall reinstate the original period of Ineligibility. If the IPCA decides to reinstate a suspended period of Ineligibility or decides not to reinstate a suspended period of Ineligibility, that decision may be appealed by any Person entitled to appeal under Article 13.

10.6.1.2 To further encourage Athletes and other Persons to provide Substantial Assistance to Anti-Doping Organizations, at the request of the IPCA or at the request of the Athlete or other Person who has (or has been asserted to have) committed an anti-doping rule violation, WADA may agree at any stage of the results management process, including after a final appellate decision under Article 13, to what it considers to be an appropriate suspension of the otherwise-applicable period of Ineligibility and other Consequences. In exceptional circumstances, WADA may agree to suspensions of the period of Ineligibility and other Consequences for Substantial Assistance greater than those otherwise provided in this Article, or even no period of Ineligibility, and/or no return of prize money or payment of fines or costs. WADA’s approval shall be subject to reinstatement of sanction, as otherwise provided in this Article. Notwithstanding Article 13, WADA’s decisions in the context of this Article may not be appealed by any other Anti-Doping Organization.

10.6.1.3 If the IPCA suspends any part of an otherwise applicable sanction because of Substantial Assistance, then notice providing justification for the decision shall be provided to the other Anti- Doping Organizations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3 as provided in Article 14.2. In unique circumstances where WADA determines that it would be in the best interest of anti-doping, WADA may authorize the IPCA to enter into appropriate confidentiality agreements limiting or delaying the disclosure of the Substantial Assistance agreement or the nature of Substantial Assistance being provided.

[Comment to Article 10.6.1: The cooperation of Athletes, Athlete Support Personnel and other Persons who acknowledge their mistakes and are willing to bring other anti-doping rule violations to light is important to clean sport. This is the only circumstance under the Code where the suspension of an otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility is authorized.]

10.6.2 Admission of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation in the Absence of Other Evidence

Where an Athlete or other Person voluntarily admits the commission of an anti-doping rule violation before having received notice of a Sample collection which could establish an anti-doping rule violation (or, in the case of an anti-doping rule violation other than Article 2.1, before receiving first notice of the admitted violation pursuant to Article 7) and that admission is the only reliable evidence of the violation at the time of admission, then the period of Ineligibility may be reduced, but not below one-half of the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable.

[Comment to Article 10.6.2: This Article is intended to apply when an Athlete or other Person comes forward and admits to an anti-doping rule violation in circumstances where no Anti-Doping Organization is aware that an anti-doping rule violation might have been committed. It is not intended to apply to circumstances where the admission occurs after the Athlete or other Person believes he or she is about to be caught. The amount by which Ineligibility is reduced should be based on the likelihood that the Athlete or other Person would have been caught had he/she not come forward voluntarily.]

10.6.3 Prompt Admission of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation after being Confronted with a Violation Sanctionable under Article 10.2.1 or Article 10.3.1

An Athlete or other Person potentially subject to a four-year sanction under Article 10.2.1 or 10.3.1 (for evading or refusing Sample Collection or Tampering with Sample Collection), by promptly admitting the asserted anti-doping rule violation after being confronted by the IPCA, and also upon the approval and at the discretion of both WADA and the IPCA, may receive a reduction in the period of Ineligibility down to a minimum of two years, depending on the seriousness of the violation and the Athlete or other Person’s degree of Fault.

10.6.4 Application of Multiple Grounds for Reduction of a Sanction

Where an Athlete or other Person establishes entitlement to reduction in sanction under more than one provision of Article 10.4, 10.5 or 10.6, before applying any reduction or suspension under Article 10.6, the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility shall be determined in accordance with Articles 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, and 10.5. If the Athlete or other Person establishes entitlement to a reduction or suspension of the period of Ineligibility under Article 10.6, then the period of Ineligibility may be reduced or suspended, but not below one-fourth of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility.

[Comment to Article 10.6.4: The appropriate sanction is determined in a sequence of four steps. First, the hearing panel determines which of the basic sanctions (Articles 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, or 10.5) apply to the particular anti-doping rule violation. Second, if the basic sanction provides for a range of sanctions, the hearing panel must determine the applicable sanction within that range according to the Athlete or other Person’s degree of Fault. In a third step, the hearing panel establishes whether there is a basis for elimination, suspension, or reduction of the sanction (Article 10.6). Finally, the hearing panel decides on the commencement of the period of Ineligibility under Article 10.11. Several examples of how Article 10 is to be applied are found in Appendix 2.]

10.7 Multiple Violations

10.7.1 For an Athlete or other Person’s second anti-doping rule violation, the period of Ineligibility shall be the greater of

six months;

one-half of the period of Ineligibility imposed for the first anti-doping rule violation without taking into account any reduction under Article 10.6; or

twice the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable to the second anti-doping rule violation treated as if it were a first violation, without taking into account any reduction under Article 10.6.

The period of Ineligibility established above may then be further reduced by the application of Article 10.6.

10.7.2 A third anti-doping rule violation will always result in a lifetime period of Ineligibility, except if the third violation fulfills the condition for elimination or reduction of the period of Ineligibility under Article 10.4 or 10.5, or involves a violation of Article 2.4. In these particular cases, the period of Ineligibility shall be from eight years to lifetime Ineligibility.

10.7.3 An anti-doping rule violation for which an Athlete or other Person has established No Fault or Negligence shall not be considered a prior violation for purposes of this Article.

10.7.4 Additional Rules for Certain Potential Multiple Violations

10.7.4.1 For purposes of imposing sanctions under Article 10.7, an anti-doping rule violation will only be considered a second violation if the IPCA can establish that the Athlete or other Person committed the second anti-doping rule violation after the Athlete or other Person received notice pursuant to Article 7, or after [IF] made reasonable efforts to give notice of the first anti-doping rule violation. If the IPCA cannot establish this, the violations shall be considered together as one single first violation, and the sanction imposed shall be based on the violation that carries the more severe sanction.

10.7.4.2 If, after the imposition of a sanction for a first anti-doping rule violation, the IPCA discovers facts involving an anti-doping rule violation by the Athlete or other Person which occurred prior to notification regarding the first violation, then the IPCA shall impose an additional sanction based on the sanction that could have been imposed if the two violations had been adjudicated at the same time. Results in all Competitions dating back to the earlier anti-doping rule violation will be Disqualified as provided in Article 10.8.

10.7.5 Multiple Anti-Doping Rule Violations during Ten-Year Period

For purposes of Article 10.7, each anti-doping rule violation must take place within the same ten-year period in order to be considered multiple violations.

10.8 Disqualification of Results in Competitions Subsequent to Sample Collection or Commission of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation

In addition to the automatic Disqualification of the results in the Competition which produced the positive Sample under Article 9, all other competitive results of the Athlete obtained from the date a positive Sample was collected (whether In-Competition or Out-of-Competition), or other anti-doping rule violation occurred, through the commencement of any Provisional Suspension or Ineligibility period, shall, unless fairness requires otherwise, be Disqualified with all of the resulting Consequences including forfeiture of any medals, points and prizes.

[Comment to Article 10.8: Nothing in the Code precludes clean Athletes or other Persons who have been damaged by the actions of a Person who has committed an anti-doping rule violation from pursuing any right, which they would otherwise have to seek damages from such Person.]

10.9 Allocation of CAS Cost Awards and Forfeited Prize Money

The priority for repayment of CAS cost awards and forfeited prize money shall be: first, payment of costs awarded by CAS; second, reallocation of forfeited prize money to other Athletes; and third, reimbursement of the expenses of IPCA.

10.10 Financial Consequences

Where an Athlete or other Person commits an anti-doping rule violation, the IPCA may, in its discretion and subject to the principle of proportionality, elect to a) recover from the Athlete or other Person costs associated with the anti-doping rule violation, regardless of the period of Ineligibility imposed and/or b) fine the Athlete or other Person in an amount up to $1.000 U.S. Dollars, only in cases where the maximum period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable has already been imposed.

The imposition of a financial sanction or the the IPCA’s recovery of costs shall not be considered a basis for reducing the Ineligibility or other sanction which would otherwise be applicable under the Code.

10.11 Commencement of Ineligibility Period

Except as provided below, the period of Ineligibility shall start on the date of the final hearing decision providing for Ineligibility or, if the hearing is waived or there is no hearing, on the date Ineligibility is accepted or otherwise imposed.

10.11.1 Delays Not Attributable to the Athlete or other Person

Where there have been substantial delays in the hearing process or other aspects of Doping Control not attributable to the Athlete or other Person, the IPCA may start the period of Ineligibility at an earlier date commencing as early as the date of Sample collection or the date on which another anti-doping rule violation last occurred. All competitive results achieved during the period of Ineligibility, including retroactive Ineligibility, shall be Disqualified.

[Comment to Article 10.11.1: In cases of anti-doping rule violations other than under Article 2.1, the time required for an Anti-Doping Organization to discover and develop facts sufficient to establish an anti-doping rule violation may be lengthy, particularly where the Athlete or other Person has taken affirmative action to avoid detection. In these circumstances, the flexibility provided in this Article to start the sanction at an earlier date should not be used.]

10.11.2 Timely Admission

Where the Athlete or other Person promptly (which, in all events, for an Athlete means before the Athlete competes again) admits the anti-doping rule violation after being confronted with the anti-doping rule violation by the IPCA, the period of Ineligibility may start as early as the date of Sample collection or the date on which another anti-doping rule violation last occurred. In each case, however, where this Article is applied, the Athlete or other Person shall serve at least one-half of the period of Ineligibility going forward from the date the Athlete or other Person accepted the imposition of a sanction, the date of a hearing decision imposing a sanction, or the date the sanction is otherwise imposed. This Article shall not apply where the period of Ineligibility has already been reduced under Article 10.6.3.

10.11.3 Credit for Provisional Suspension or Period of Ineligibility Served

10.11.3.1 If a Provisional Suspension is imposed and respected by the Athlete or other Person, then the Athlete or other Person shall receive a credit for such period of Provisional Suspension against any period of Ineligibility which may ultimately be imposed. If a period of Ineligibility is served pursuant to a decision that is subsequently appealed, then the Athlete or other Person shall receive a credit for such period of Ineligibility served against any period of Ineligibility which may ultimately be imposed on appeal.

10.11.3.2 If an Athlete or other Person voluntarily accepts a Provisional Suspension in writing from [IF] and thereafter respects the Provisional Suspension, the Athlete or other Person shall receive a credit for such period of voluntary Provisional Suspension against any period of Ineligibility which may ultimately be imposed. A copy of the Athlete or other Person’s voluntary acceptance of a Provisional Suspension shall be provided promptly to each party entitled to receive notice of an asserted anti-doping rule violation under Article 14.1.

[Comment to Article 10.11.3.2: An Athlete’s voluntary acceptance of a Provisional Suspension is not an admission by the Athlete and shall not be used in any way as to draw an adverse inference against the Athlete.]

10.11.3.3 No credit against a period of Ineligibility shall be given for any time period before the effective date of the Provisional Suspension or voluntary Provisional Suspension regardless of whether the Athlete elected not to compete or was suspended by his or her team.

10.11.3.4 In Team Sports, where a period of Ineligibility is imposed upon a team, unless fairness requires otherwise, the period of Ineligibility shall start on the date of the final hearing decision providing for Ineligibility or, if the hearing is waived, on the date Ineligibility is accepted or otherwise imposed. Any period of team Provisional Suspension (whether imposed or voluntarily accepted) shall be credited against the total period of Ineligibility to be served.

[Comment to Article 10.11: Article 10.11 makes clear that delays not attributable to the Athlete, timely admission by the Athlete and Provisional Suspension are the only justifications for starting the period of Ineligibility earlier than the date of the final hearing decision.]

10.12 Status During Ineligibility

10.12.1 Prohibition Against Participation During Ineligibility

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, Signatory’s member organization, or a club or other member organization of a Signatory’s member organization, or in Competitions authorized or organized by any professional league or any international or national level Event organization or any elite or national-level sporting activity funded by a governmental agency.

An Athlete or other Person subject to a period of Ineligibility longer than four years may, after completing four years of the period of Ineligibility, participate as an Athlete in local sport events not sanctioned or otherwise under the jurisdiction of a Code Signatory or member of a Code Signatory, but only so long as the local sport event is not at a level that could otherwise qualify such Athlete or other Person directly or indirectly to compete in (or accumulate points toward) a national championship or International Event, and does not involve the Athlete or other Person working in any capacity with Minors.

An Athlete or other Person subject to a period of Ineligibility shall remain subject to Testing.

[Comment to Article 10.12.1: For example, subject to Article 10.12.2 below, an Ineligible Athlete cannot participate in a training camp, exhibition or practice organized by his or her National Federation or a club which is a member of that National Federation or which is funded by a governmental agency. Further, an Ineligible Athlete may not compete in a non-Signatory professional league (e.g., the National Hockey League etc.), Events organized by a non-Signatory International Event organization or a non-Signatory national-level event organization without triggering the Consequences set forth in Article 10.12.3. The term “activity” also includes, for example, administrative activities, such as serving as an official, director, officer, employee, or volunteer of the organization described in this Article. Ineligibility imposed in one sport shall also be recognized by other sports (see Article 15.1, Mutual Recognition).]

10.12.2 Return to Training

As an exception to Article 10.12.1, an Athlete may return to train with a team or to use the facilities of a club or other member organization of the IPCA’s member organization during the shorter of: (1) the last two months of the Athlete’s period of Ineligibility, or (2) the last one-quarter of the period of Ineligibility imposed.

[Comment to Article 10.12.2: In many Team Sports and some individual sports, an Athlete cannot effectively train on his/her own so as to be ready to compete at the end of the Athlete’s period of Ineligibility. During the training period described in this Article, an Ineligible Athlete may not compete or engage in any activity described in Article 10.12.1 other than training.]

10.12.3 Violation of the Prohibition of Participation During Ineligibility

Where an Athlete or other Person who has been declared Ineligible violates the prohibition against participation during Ineligibility described in Article 10.12.1, the results of such participation shall be Disqualified and a new period of Ineligibility equal in length up to the original period of Ineligibility shall be added to the end of the original period of Ineligibility. The new period of Ineligibility may be adjusted based on the Athlete or other Person’s degree of Fault and other circumstances of the case. The determination of whether an Athlete or other Person has violated the prohibition against participation, and whether an adjustment is appropriate, shall be made by the Anti-Doping Organization whose results management led to the imposition of the initial period of Ineligibility. This decision may be appealed under Article 13.

Where an Athlete Support Person or other Person assists a Person in violating the prohibition against participation during Ineligibility, the IPCA shall impose sanctions for a violation of Article 2.9 for such assistance.

10.12.4 Withholding of Financial Support during Ineligibility

In addition, for any anti-doping rule violation not involving a reduced sanction as described in Article 10.4 or 10.5, some or all sport-related financial support or other sport-related benefits received by such Person will be withheld by the IPCA and its National Federations.

10.13 Automatic Publication of Sanction

A mandatory part of each sanction shall include automatic publication, as provided in Article 14.3.

[Comment to Article 10: Harmonization of sanctions has been one of the most discussed and debated areas of anti-doping. Harmonization means that the same rules and criteria are applied to assess the unique facts of each case. Arguments against requiring harmonization of sanctions are based on differences between sports including, for example, the following: in some sports the Athletes are professionals making a sizable income from the sport and in others the Athletes are true amateurs; in those sports where an Athlete’s career is short, a standard period of Ineligibility has a much more significant effect on the Athlete than in sports where careers are traditionally much longer. A primary argument in favor of harmonization is that it is simply not right that two Athletes from the same country who test positive for the same Prohibited Substance under similar circumstances should receive different sanctions only because they participate in different sports. In addition, flexibility in sanctioning has often been viewed as an unacceptable opportunity for some sporting organizations to be more lenient with dopers. The lack of harmonization of sanctions has also frequently been the source of jurisdictional conflicts between International Federations and National Anti-Doping Organizations.]

ARTICLE 11: CONSEQUENCES TO TEAM IN TEAM SPORTS AND INDIVIDUAL SPORTS

11.1 Testing of Team Sports

Where more than one member of a team in a Team Sport has been notified of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation under Article 7 in connection with an Event, the ruling body for the Event shall conduct appropriate Target Testing of the team during the Event Period.

11.2 Consequences for Team Sports

If more than one member of a team in a Team Sport is found to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation during an Event Period, the ruling body of the Event shall impose an appropriate sanction on the team (e.g., loss of points, Disqualification from a Competition or Event, or other sanction) in addition to any Consequences imposed upon the individual Athletes committing the Anti-Doping Rule Violation.

11.3 Event Ruling Body May Establish Stricter Consequences to Team Sports

The ruling body for an Event may elect to establish rules for the Event which imposes Consequences for Team Sports stricter than those in Article 11.2 for purposes of the Event.

[Comment to Article 11.3: For example, the IPCA could establish rules which would require Disqualification of a Team from the Games of the IPCA World Chess Championsips based on a lesser number of Anti-Doping Rule Violations during the period of the Games.]

11.4 Consequences for Teams in Individual Sports

If a member of a Team in an Individual Sport is found to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation during an Event Period, the ruling body of the Event shall impose an appropriate sanction on the Team (e.g., loss of points, Disqualification from a Competition or Event, or other sanction) in addition to any Consequences imposed upon the individual Athletes committing the Anti-Doping Rule Violation. If a member of a Team in an Individual Sport is found to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation outside an Event Period, the IPCA shall impose an appropriate sanction on the Team (e.g., loss of points, Disqualification from a Competition or Event, or other sanction) in addition to any Consequences imposed upon the individual Athletes committing the Anti-Doping Rule Violation. Only the individual member of the Team found to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation is liable to a period of Ineligibility

ARTICLE 12: SANCTIONS AGAINST SIGNATORIES AND AGAINST SPORTING BODIES THAT ARE NOT SIGNATORIES

12.1 The International Standard for Code Compliance by Signatories sets out when and how WADA may proceed against a Signatory for failure to comply with its obligations under the Code and/or the International Standards, and identifies the range of possible sanctions that may be imposed on the Signatory for such non- compliance.

ARTICLE 13: APPEALS

13.1 Decisions Subject to Appeal

Decisions made under this Code may be appealed as set forth below in Articles 13.2 through 13.5 or as otherwise provided in this Code, the WADC or the International Standards. Such decisions shall remain in effect while under appeal unless the appellate body orders otherwise. Before an appeal is commenced, any post- decision review authorized in the Anti-Doping Organization’s rules must be exhausted, provided that such review respects the principles set forth in Article 13.2.2 below (except as provided for in Article 13.1.3)

13.1.1 Scope of Review Not Limited

The scope of review on appeal includes all issues relevant to the matter and is expressly not limited to the issues or scope of review before the initial decision maker.

13.1.2 CAS Shall Not Defer to the Findings Being Appealed

In making its decision, CAS need not give deference to the discretion exercised by the body whose decision is being appealed.

[Comment to Article 13.1.2: CAS proceedings are de novo. Prior proceedings do not limit the evidence or carry weight in the hearing before CAS.]

13.1.3 WADA Not Required to Exhaust Internal Remedies

Where WADA has a right to appeal under Article 13 and no other party has appealed a final decision within the IPCA’s process, WADA may appeal such decision directly to CAS without having to exhaust other remedies in the IPCA process.

[Comment to Article 13.1.1: Where a decision has been rendered before the final stage of the IPCA’s process (for example, a first hearing) and no party elects to appeal that decision to the next level of the IPCA’s (e.g., the Governing Board), then WADA may bypass the remaining steps in the IPCA’s process and appeal directly to CAS.]

13.2 Appeals from Decisions Regarding Anti-Doping Rule Violations, Consequences, Provisional Suspensions, Recognition of Decisions and Jurisdiction

A decision that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation was committed, a decision imposing Consequences or not imposing Consequences for an Anti-Doping Rule Violation, or a decision that no Anti-Doping Rule Violation was committed; a decision that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation proceeding cannot go forward for procedural reasons (including, for example, prescription); a decision by WADA not to grant an exception to the six month notice requirement for a retired Athlete to return to Competition under Article 5.7.1; a decision by WADA assigning results management under Article 7.1 of the WADC; the IPCA’s failure to comply with Article 7.9 of the WADC;

• a decision under Article 10.10.2 (Violation of the Prohibition of Participation during Ineligibility)

• a decision that The IPCA lacks jurisdiction to rule on an alleged Anti-Doping Rule Violation or its Consequences

• a decision by the IPCA not to bring forward an Adverse Analytical Finding or an Atypical Finding as an Anti-Doping Rule Violation

• or a decision not to go forward with an Anti-Doping Rule Violation after an investigation under Article 7.7 and

• a decision to impose a Provisional Suspension as a result of a Provisional Hearing; a decision to suspend, or not suspend, a period of Ineligibility or to reinstate, or not reinstate, a suspended period of Ineligibility under Article 10.6.1; a decision under Article 10.12.3; and a decision by the IPCA not to recognize another Anti-Doping Organization’s decision under Article 15, may be appealed exclusively as provided in Articles 13.2 – 13.7.

13.2.1 Appeals Involving International-Level Athletes or International Events

In cases arising from participation in an International Event or in cases involving International-Level Athletes, the decision may be appealed exclusively to CAS.

[Comment to Article 13.2.1: CAS decisions are final and binding except for any review required by law applicable to the annulment or enforcement of arbitral awards.]

13.2.2 Appeals Involving Other Athletes or Other Persons

In cases where Article 13.2.1 is not applicable, the decision may be appealed to a national-level appeal body, being an independent and impartial body established in accordance with rules adopted by the National Anti- Doping Organization having jurisdiction over the Athlete or other Person. The rules for such appeal shall respect the following principles: a timely hearing; a fair and impartial hearing panel; the right to be represented by counsel at the Person’s own expense; and a timely, written, reasoned decision. If the National Anti-Doping Organization has not established such a body, the decision may be appealed to CAS in accordance with the provisions applicable before such court.

13.2.3 Persons Entitled to Appeal

In cases under Article 13.2.1, the following parties shall have the right to appeal to CAS: (a) the Athlete or other Person who is the subject of the decision being appealed; (b) the other party to the case in which the decision was rendered; (c) the IPCA; (d) the National Anti-Doping Organization of the Person’s country of residence or countries where the Person is a national or license holder; (e) the International Olympic Committee or International Paralympic Committee, as applicable, where the decision may have an effect in relation to the Olympic Games or Paralympic Games, including decisions affecting eligibility for the Olympic Games or Paralympic Games; and (f) WADA.

In cases under Article 13.2.2, the parties having the right to appeal to the national-level appeal body shall be as provided in the National Anti-Doping Organization’s rules but, at a minimum, shall include the following parties: (a) the Athlete or other Person who is the subject of the decision being appealed; (b) the other party to the case in which the decision was rendered; (c) the IPCA; (d) the National Anti-Doping Organization of the Person’s country of residence; (e) the International Olympic Committee or International Paralympic Committee, as applicable, where the decision may have an effect in relation to the Olympic Games or Paralympic Games, including decisions affecting eligibility for the Olympic Games or Paralympic Games; and (f) WADA. For cases under Article 13.2.2, WADA, the International Olympic Committee, the International Paralympic Committee, and the IPCA shall also have the right to appeal to CAS with respect to the decision of the national-level appeal body. Any party filing an appeal shall be entitled to assistance from CAS to obtain all relevant information from the Anti-Doping Organization whose decision is being appealed and the information shall be provided if CAS so directs.

Notwithstanding any other provision herein, the only Person who may appeal from a Provisional Suspension is the Athlete or other Person upon whom the Provisional Suspension is imposed.

13.2.4 Cross Appeals and other Subsequent Appeals Allowed

Cross appeals and other subsequent appeals by any respondent named in cases brought to CAS under the Code are specifically permitted. Any party with a right to appeal under this Article 13 must file a cross appeal or subsequent appeal at the latest with the party’s answer.

13.3 Failure to Render a Timely Decision

13.3.1 Where, in a particular case, a National Sport Organization or National Anti-Doping Organization fails to render a decision with respect to whether an Anti-Doping Rule Violation was committed within a reasonable deadline set by the IPCA, the IPCA may elect to appeal directly to CAS as if the National Sport Organization had rendered a decision finding no Anti- Doping Rule Violation. If the CAS hearing body determines that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation was committed and that the IPCA acted reasonably in electing to appeal directly to CAS, then the IPCA’s costs and attorney’s fees in prosecuting the appeal shall be reimbursed to the IPCA by the National Sport Organization.

13.3.2 Where, in a particular case, the IPCA fails to render a decision with respect to whether an Anti-Doping Rule Violation was committed within a reasonable deadline set by WADA, WADA may elect to appeal directly to CAS as if the IPCA had rendered a decision finding no Anti-Doping Rule Violation. If the CAS hearing body determines that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation was committed and that WADA acted reasonably in electing to appeal directly to CAS, then WADA’s costs and attorney’s fees in prosecuting the appeal shall be reimbursed to WADA by the IPCA.

[Comment to Article 13.3: Given the different circumstances of each Anti-Doping Rule Violation investigation and results management process, it is not feasible to establish a fixed time period for an Anti-Doping Organization to render a decision before the IPCA or WADA may intervene by appealing directly to CAS. Before taking such action, however, the IPCA or WADA will consult with the Anti-Doping Organization and give the Anti-Doping Organization an opportunity to explain why it has not yet rendered a decision.]

13.4 Appeals from Decisions Granting or Denying a TUE

TUE decisions may be appealed exclusively as provided in Article 4.4 of the WADC.

13.5 Notification of Appeal Decisions

Any Anti-Doping Organization that is a party to an appeal shall promptly provide the appeal decision to the Athlete or other Person and to the other Anti-Doping Organizations that would have been entitled to appeal under Article 13.2.3 as provided under Article 14.2

13.6 Appeals from decisions under Article 23.5.5

A notice that is not disputed and so becomes a final decision under Article 23.5.5, finding a Signatory non- compliant with the Code and imposing consequences for such non-compliance, as well as conditions for reinstatement of the Signatory, may be appealed to CAS as provided in the International Standard for Code Compliance by Signatories.

13.7 Time for Filing Appeals

13.7.1 Appeals to CAS

The time to file an appeal to CAS shall be twenty-one (21) days from the date of receipt of the decision by the appealing party. The above notwithstanding, the following shall apply in connection with Appeals filed by a party entitled to appeal but which was not a party to the proceedings having led to the decision subject to appeal:

13.7.1.1 Within fifteen (15) days from notice of the decision, such party (ies) shall have the right to requesta copy of the case file from the body that issued the decision;

13.7.1.2 If such a request is made within the fifteen (15) day period, then the party making such request shall have twenty-one (21) days from receipt of the file to file an appeal to CAS. The above notwithstanding, the filing deadline for an appeal filed by WADA shall be the later of:

Twenty-one days after the last day on which any other party in the case could have appealed; or

Twenty-one days after WADA’s receipt of the complete file relating to the decision.

13.7.2 Appeals Under Article 13.2.2

The time to file an appeal to an independent and impartial body established at national level in accordance with rules established by the National Anti-Doping Organization shall be indicated by the same rules of the National Anti-Doping Organization.

The above notwithstanding, the filing deadline for an appeal or intervention filed by WADA shall be the later of:

(a) Twenty-one days after the last day on which any other party in the case could have appealed, or

(b) Twenty-one days after WADA’s receipt of the complete file relating to the decision

ARTICLE 14: CONFIDENTIALITY, NOTICE AND REPORTING

14.1 Information Concerning Adverse Analytical Findings and Other Potential Anti-Doping Rule Violations

14.1.1 Notice of Anti-Doping Rule Violations to Athletes and Other Persons

An Athlete whose Sample is brought forward as an Adverse Analytical Finding after the initial review under Article 7, or an Athlete or other Person who is asserted to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation after the initial review under Article 7, shall be notified by the IPCA through the relevant National Sport Organization and as provided in Article 7.

14.1.2 Notice to National Anti-Doping Organizations, and WADA

The IPCA shall also notify the Athlete’s National Sport Organization or National Anti-Doping Organization and WADA of the assertion of an anti-doping rule violation simultaneously with the notice to the Athlete or other Person.

14.1.3 Content of Notification

Notification shall include the Athlete’s name, country, the Athlete’s competitive level, governing body, Sport and discipline within the Sport, whether the test was In-Competition or Out-of-Competition, the date of Sample collection, the analytical result reported by the laboratory and other information as required by the International Standard for Testing and Investigations, or, for anti-doping rule violations other than Article 2.1, the rule violated and the basis of the asserted violation.

14.1.4 Status Reports

The Anti-Doping Organizations referenced in Article 14.1.2 of the WADC shall be regularly updated on the status and findings of any review or proceedings conducted pursuant to Articles 7, 8 (Hearings) or 13 (Appeals) and shall be provided with a prompt written reasoned explanation or decision explaining the resolution of the matter.

14.1.5 Records of Adverse Analytical Findings from National Sport Organizations Records of sanctions National Sport Organizations shall be forwarded to the IPCA. Such records will be maintained by the IPCA.

14.1.6 Confidentiality

The recipient organizations shall not disclose information concerning Adverse Analytical Findings and other potential Anti-Doping Rule Violations beyond those Persons with a need to know (which would include the appropriate personnel at the applicable National Sport Organization and team in a Team Sport) until the Anti-Doping Organization with results management responsibility has made Public Disclosure or has failed to make Public Disclosure as required in Article 14.2 below. The IPCA Anti-Doping Committee or IPCA Presidential Board, non-voting observers, selected surrogates and all other relevant the IPCA staff and representatives shall maintain in strict confidentiality the Results of all Doping Control Testing and the identities involved in proceedings under this Code, until such time as (a) all proceedings are completed and (b) there has been a Public Disclosure by the IPCA Presidential Board

[Comment to Article 14.1.6: The IPCA shall provide, in its own rules, procedures for the protection of confidential information and for investigating and disciplining improper disclosure of confidential information by any employee or agent of the Anti-Doping Organization.]

14.2 Notice of Anti-Doping Rule Violation Decisions and Request for Files

14.2.1 Anti-doping rule violation decisions rendered pursuant to Article 7.11, 8.2, 10.4, 10.5, 10.6, 10.12.3 or 13.5 of the WADC shall include the full reasons for the decision, including, if applicable, a justification for why the greatest possible Consequences were not imposed. Where the decision is not in English or French, the IPCA shall provide a short English or French summary of the decision and the supporting reasons.

14.2.2 An Anti-Doping Organization having a right to appeal a decision received pursuant to Article 14.2.1 may, within fifteen days of receipt, request a copy of the full case file pertaining to the decision.

14.3 Public Disclosure

14.3.1 The identity of any Athlete or other Person, who is asserted by the IPCA to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation, may be Publicly Disclosed by the IPCA only after notice has been provided to the Athlete or other Person in accordance with Article 7, and to the applicable Anti-Doping Organizations in accordance with Article 14.1.2 of the WADC.

14.3.2 No later than twenty (20) days after it has been determined in a final appellate decision under Article 13.2.1 or 13.2.2, , or such appeal has been waived, or a hearing in accordance with Article 8 has been waived, or the assertion of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation has not been otherwise timely challenged, the IPCA Presidential Board or National Federation responsible for results management must Publicly Report the disposition of the Anti-Doping matter including the Sport, the Anti-Doping rule violated, the name of the Athlete or other Person committing the violation, the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method involved and the Consequences imposed. The IPCA must also Publicly Report within twenty (20) days the results of final appeal decisions concerning Anti-Doping Rule Violations. The IPCA shall also, within the time period for publication, send all hearing and appeal decisions to WADA.

14.3.3 In any case where it is determined, after a hearing or appeal, that the Athlete or other Person did not commit an Anti-Doping Rule Violation, the decision may be Publicly Disclosed only with the consent of the Athlete or other Person who is the subject of the decision. The IPCA shall use reasonable efforts to obtain such consent, and if consent is obtained, shall Publicly Disclosethe decision in its entirety or in such redacted form as the Athlete or other Person may approve.

14.3.4 Publication shall be accomplished at a minimum by placing the required information on the IPCA or National Federation’s website and leaving the information up for the longer of one month or the duration of any period of Ineligibility.

14.3.5 Neither the IPCA, nor any other Anti-Doping Organization, or official of either, shall publicly comment on the specific facts of a pending case (as opposed to general description of process and science) except in response to public comments attributed to the Athlete, other Person or their representatives.

14.3.6 The mandatory Public Reporting required in 14.3.2 shall not be required where the Athlete or other Person who has been found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation is a Minor. Any optional Public Reporting in a case involving a Minor shall be proportionate to the facts and circumstances of the case.

14.4 Statistical Reporting

The IPCA will publish, at least annually, a statistical report of its Doping Control activities. A copy will be provided to WADA. The IPCA may also publish reports showing the name of each Athlete tested and the date of each Testing.

14.5 Doping Control Information Clearing House

To facilitate coordinated test distribution planning and to avoid unnecessary duplication in Testing by the various Anti-Doping Organizations, the IPCA shall report all In-Competition and Out-of- Competition tests on such Athletes to the WADA clearinghouse as soon as possible after such tests have been conducted. This information will be made accessible, where appropriate and in accordance with the applicable rules, to the Athlete, the Athlete’s National Sport Organization, National Anti-Doping Organization and any other Anti-Doping Organizations with Testing authority over the Athlete.

14.6 Data Privacy

When performing obligations under the Code, the IPCA may collect, store, process or disclose personal information relating to Athletes and other Persons where necessary and appropriate to conduct their activities under the WADC and the International Standards (including specifically the International Standard for the Protection of Privacy and Personal Information), and in compliance with applicable law.

ARTICLE 15: APPLICATION AND RECOGNITION OF DECISIONS

15.1 Subject to the right to appeal provided in Article 13, Testing, hearing results or other final adjudications of any Signatory which are consistent with the Code and are within that Signatory’s authority shall be applicable worldwide and shall be recognized and respected by the IPCA and all its National Federations.

[Comment to Article 15.1: The extent of recognition of TUE decisions of other Anti-Doping Organizations shall be determined by Article 4.4 and the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions.]

15.2 The IPCA and its National Federations shall recognize the measures taken by other bodies which have not accepted the Code if the rules of those bodies are otherwise consistent with the Code.

[Comment to Article 15.2: Where the decision of a body that has not accepted the Code is in some respects Code compliant and in other respects not Code compliant, [IF] and its National Federations shall attempt to apply the decision in harmony with the principles of the Code. For example, if in a process consistent with the Code a non-Signatory has found an Athlete to have committed an anti-doping rule violation on account of the presence of a Prohibited Substance in his or her body but the period of Ineligibility applied is shorter than the period provided for in the Code, then [IF] shall recognize the finding of an anti-doping rule violation and may conduct a hearing consistent with Article 8 to determine whether the longer period of Ineligibility provided in the Code should be imposed.]

15.3 Subject to the right to appeal provided in Article 13, any decision of the IPCA regarding a violation of the Code shall be recognized by all National Federations, which shall take all necessary action to render such decision effective.

ARTICLE 16: INCORPORATION OF IPCA ANTI-DOPING CODE AND OBLIGATIONS OF NATIONAL FEDERATIONS

16.1 All National Sport Organizations and their members shall comply with this Code. All National Sport Organizations and other members shall include in their regulations the provisions necessary to ensure that IPCA may enforce this Code directly as against Athletes under their anti-doping jurisdiction (including National-Level Athletes). This Code shall also be incorporated either directly or by reference into each National Sport Organizations’s rules so that the National Sport Organization may enforce them itself directly as against Athletes under its anti-doping jurisdiction (including National-Level Athletes).

16.2 All National Sport Organizations shall establish rules requiring all Athletes and each Athlete Support Personnel who participates as coach, trainer, manager, team staff, official, medical or paramedical personnel in a Competition or activity authorized or organized by a National Sport Organization or one of its member organizations to agree to be bound by these Code and to submit to the results management authority of the Anti-Doping Organization responsible under the Code as a condition of such participation.

16.3 All National Sport Organizations shall report any information suggesting or relating to an anti-doping rule violation to IPCA and to their National Anti-Doping Organizations, and shall cooperate with investigations conducted by any Anti-Doping Organization with authority to conduct the investigation.

16.4 All National Sport Organizations shall have disciplinary rules in place to prevent Athlete Support Personnel who are Using Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods without valid justification from providing support to Athletes under the jurisdiction of IPCA or the National Sport Organization.

16.5 All National Sport Organizations shall be required to conduct anti-doping education in coordination with their National Anti-Doping Organizations.

ARTICLE 17: STATUTE OF LIMITATION

No anti-doping rule violation proceeding may be commenced against an Athlete or other Person unless he or she has been notified of the anti-doping rule violation as provided in Article 7, or notification has been reasonably attempted, within ten years from the date the violation is asserted to have occurred.

ARTICLE 18: EDUCATION

18.1 The IPCA shall implement, evaluate and monitor information and education programs for doping-free Sport.

18.2 All the IPCA member organizations as Signatories to the WADC and in compliance with the Code, shall also develop information and education programs for doping-free Sport for Athletes and Athlete Support Personnel under the scope of their responsibility.

18.3 These programs shall provide Athletes and other Persons with updated and accurate information on at least the following issues:

• Substances and methods on the Prohibited List

• Anti-Doping Rule Violations

• Consequences of doping, including sanctions, health and social consequences

• Doping Control procedures

• Athletes’ and Athlete Support Personnel’s rights and responsibilities

• Therapeutic Use Exemptions

• Managing the risks of nutritional supplements

• Harm of doping to the spirit of Sport

The programs should promote the spirit of Sport in order to establish an environment that is strongly conducive to doping-free Sport and will have a positive and long-term influence on the choices made by Athletes and other Persons.

These programs should be directed at young people, appropriate to their stage of development, in school and Sports clubs, parents, adult Athletes, Sport officials, coaches, medical Personnel and the media (the media should also co-operate in supporting and diffusing this information).

Athlete Support Personnel should educate and counsel Athletes regarding Anti-Doping policies and rules adopted pursuant to the Code.

All Persons subject to this Code shall promote and support active participation by Athletes and Athlete Support Personnel in education programs for doping-free Sport.

[Comment to Article 18.3: Anti-Doping informational and educational programs should not be limited to National or International Level Athletes but should include all Persons, including youth, who participate in Sport under the authority of an organization subject to this Code. (See definition of Athlete.) These programs should also include Athlete Support Personnel. These principles are consistent with the UNESCO Convention with respect to education and training.]

ARTICLE 19: REINSTATEMENT

19.1 Additional Responsibilities of the IPCA

19.1.1 The IPCA will withhold some or all Paralympic funding of any Sport organization not in compliance with the Code.

19.1.2 The IPCA will authorize and facilitate the eventual Independent Observer Program and facilitate Athlete Outreach Programs.

19.2 Additional Responsibilities of National Sport Organizations

19.2.1 To ensure that their Anti-Doping policies and rules conform to the Code.

19.2.2 To require as a condition of membership or recognition that National Sport Organizations’ Anti-Doping policies and rules are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Code.

19.2.3 To co-operate with their National Anti-Doping Organization.

19.2.4 To require each of its National Sport Organization to establish rules requiring each Athlete Support Personnel who participates as coach, trainer, manager, team staff, official, medical or paramedical Personnel in an Event or activity authorized or organized by a National Sport Organization or one of its member organizations to agree to be bound by Anti-Doping rules in conformity with the Code as a condition of such participation.

19.2.5 To notify the Athlete or other Person who is asserted to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation as provided in article 14.1.1.

19.2.6 The applicable National Sport Organization is responsible for enforcing any sanction imposed by the IPCA.

19.2.7 To withhold some or all funding, during any period of his or her Ineligibility, to any Athlete or Athlete Support Personnel who has violated Anti-Doping rules.

19.2.8 To withhold some or all funding to its member or recognized National Sport Organization that is not in compliance with the Code.

19.2.9 To vigorously pursue all potential Anti-Doping Rule Violations within its jurisdiction including investigation into whether Athlete Support Personnel or other Persons may have been involved in each case of doping.

19.2.10 To promote Anti-Doping education.

19.2.11 To co-operate with relevant national organizations and agencies and other Anti-Doping Organizations.

19.3 Rules and Responsibilities of the IPCA as a Major Event Organization

19.3.1 To adopt and implement Anti-Doping policies and rules for their Events which conform to the Code.

19.3.2 To take appropriate action to discourage noncompliance with the Code as provided in WADC Article 23.5.

19.3.3 To authorize and facilitate the Independent Observer Program and facilitate Athlete Outreach Programs.

19.3.4 To require all Athletes and each Athlete Support Personnel who participates as coach, trainer, manager, team staff, official, medical or paramedical Personnel in the Event to agree to be bound by Anti-Doping rules in conformity with the Code as a condition of such participation.

19.3.5 To vigorously pursue all potential Anti-Doping Rule Violations within its jurisdiction including investigation into whether Athlete Support Personnel or other Persons may have been involved in each case of doping.

19.3.6 To promote Anti-Doping education.

19.3.7 To co-operate with relevant national organizations and agencies and other Anti-Doping Organizations.

19.4 Roles and Responsibilities of Athletes

19.4.1 To be knowledgeable of and comply with all applicable Anti- Doping policies and rules adopted pursuant to the Code.

19.4.2 To be available for Sample collection.

19.4.3 To take responsibility, in the context of Anti-Doping, for what they ingest and Use.

19.4.4 To inform medical personnel of their obligation not to Use Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods and to take responsibility to make sure that any medical treatment received does not violate Anti- Doping policies and rules adopted pursuant to the Code.

19.4.5 To disclose to their National Anti-Doping Organization and to [IF] any decision by a non-Signatory finding that the Athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation within the previous ten years.

19.4.6 To cooperate with Anti-Doping Organizations investigating anti-doping rule violations.

19.4.7 Failure by any Athlete to cooperate in full with Anti-Doping Organizations investigating anti-doping rule violations may result in a charge of misconduct under the IPCA’s disciplinary rules/Code of conduct.

19.5 Roles and Responsibilities of Athlete Support Personnel

19.5.1 To be knowledgeable of and comply with all Anti-Doping policies and rules adopted pursuant to the Code and which are applicable to them or the Athletes whom they support.

19.5.2 To co-operate with the Athlete Testing Program.

19.5.3 To use their influence on Athlete values and behaviour to foster Anti-Doping attitudes.

19.5.4 To disclose to his or her National Anti-Doping Organization and to the IPCA any decision by a non-Signatory finding that he or she committed an anti-doping rule violation within the previous ten years.

19.5.5 To cooperate with Anti-Doping Organizations investigating anti-doping rule violations.

19.5.6 Failure by any Athlete Support Personnel to cooperate in full with Anti-Doping Organizations investigating anti-doping rule violations may result in a charge of misconduct under the IPCA’s disciplinary rules/Code of conduct.

19.5.7 Athlete Support Personnel shall not Use or Possess any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method without valid justification.

19.5.8 Use or Possession of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method by an Athlete Support Personnel without valid justification may result in a charge of misconduct under the IPCA’s disciplinary rules/Code of conduct.

ARTICLE 20: RESEARCH

20.1 Purpose and Aims of Anti-Doping Research Anti-doping research contributes to the development and implementation of efficient programs within Doping

Control and to information and education regarding doping-free sport.

All Signatories shall, in cooperation with each other and governments, encourage, promote such research, and take all reasonable measures to ensure that the results of such research are used for the promotion of the goals that are consistent with the principles of the Code.

20.2 Types of Research

Relevant anti-doping research may include, for example, sociological, behavioral, juridical and ethical studies in addition to medical, analytical and physiological investigation. Studies on devising and evaluating the efficacy of scientifically-based physiological and psychological training programs that are consistent with the principles of the Code and respectful of the integrity of the human subjects, as well as studies on the Use of emerging substances or methods resulting from scientific developments should be conducted.

20.3 Coordination of Research and Sharing of Results Coordination of anti-doping research through WADA is essential. Subject to intellectual property rights, copies of anti-doping research results shall be provided to WADA and, where appropriate, shared with relevant Signatories and Athletes and other stakeholders.

20.4 Research Practices

Anti-doping research shall comply with internationallyrecognized ethical practices.

20.5 Research Using Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods

Research efforts should avoid the Administration of Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods to Athletes.

20.6 Misuse of Results

Adequate precautions should be taken so that the results of anti-doping research are not misused and applied for doping purposes.

ARTICLE 21: INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE

21.1 The official text of the Code shall be maintained by WADA and shall be published in English and French. In the event of any conflict between the English and French versions, the English version shall prevail.

21.2 The comments annotating various provisions of the Code shall be used to interpret the Code.

21.3 The Code shall be interpreted as an independent and autonomous text and not by reference to the existing law or statutes of the Signatories or governments.

21.4 The headings used for the various Parts and Articles of the Code are for convenience only and shall not be deemed part of the substance of the Code or to affect in any way the language of the provisions to which they refer.

21.5 The Code shall not apply retroactively to matters pending before the date the Code is accepted by a Signatory and implemented in its rules. However, pre-Code anti-doping rule violations would continue to count as “first violations” or “second violations” for purposes of determining sanctions under Article 10 for subsequent post-Code violations.

21.6 The Purpose, Scope and Organization of the World Anti-Doping Program and the Code and Appendix 1, Definitions, and Appendix 2, shall be considered integral parts of the Code.

ARTICLE 22: ADDITIONAL ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF ATHLETES AND OTHER PERSONS

22.1 Roles and Responsibilities of Athletes

22.1.1 To be knowledgeable of and comply with the Code.

22.1.2 To be available for Sample collection at all times.

[Comment to Article 22.1.2: With due regard to an Athlete’s human rights and privacy, legitimate anti-doping considerations sometimes require Sample collection late at night or early in the morning. For example, it is known that some Athletes use low doses of EPO during these hours so that it will be undetectable in the morning.]

22.1.3 To take responsibility, in the context of anti-doping, for what they ingest and Use.

22.1.4 To inform medical personnel of their obligation not to Use Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods and to take responsibility to make sure that any medical treatment received does not violate the Code.

22.1.5 To disclose to their National Anti-Doping Organization and to IPCA any decision by a non-Signatory finding that the Athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation within the previous ten years.

22.1.6 To cooperate with Anti-Doping Organizations investigating anti-doping rule violations.

[NOTE: Failure to cooperate is not an anti-doping rule violation under the Code, but International Federations are strongly urged to make it the basis for disciplinary action under their general codes of conduct/disciplinary rules. The following provides an example of the type of clause that an International Federation could include in its anti-doping rules:]

22.1.7 Failure by any Athlete to cooperate in full with Anti-Doping Organizations investigating anti-doping rule violations may result in charge of misconduct under IPCA’s disciplinary rules.

22.2 Roles and Responsibilities of Athlete Support Personnel

22.2.1 To be knowledgeable of and comply with the Code.

22.2.2 To cooperate with the Athlete Testing program.

22.2.3 To use his or her influence on Athlete values and behavior to foster anti-doping attitudes.

22.2.4 To disclose to his or her National Anti-Doping Organization and to IPCA any decision by a non- Signatory finding that he or she committed an anti-doping rule violation within the previous ten years.

22.2.5 To cooperate with Anti-Doping Organizations investigating anti-doping rule violations.

[NOTE: Failure to cooperate is not an anti-doping rule violation under the Code, but International Federations are strongly urged to make it the basis for disciplinary action under their general codes of conduct/disciplinary rules. The following article 22.2.6 provides an example of the type of clause that an International Federation could include in its anti-doping rules:]

22.2.6 Failure by any Athlete Support Personnel to cooperate in full with Anti-Doping Organizations investigating anti-doping rule violations may result in a [charge of misconduct] under IPCA’s disciplinary rules. conduct.

22.2.7 Athlete Support Personnel shall not Use or Possess any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method without valid justification.

[NOTE: Coaches and other Athlete Support Personnel are often role models for Athletes. They should not be engaging in personal conduct which conflicts with their responsibility to encourage their Athletes not to dope. Use or Possession of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method by an Athlete Support Personnel without valid justification is not an anti-doping rule violation under the Code, but International Federations are strongly urged to make it the basis for disciplinary action under their general codes of conduct/disciplinary rules. The following provides an example of the type of clause that an International Federation could include in its anti- doping rules:]

22.2.8 Use or Possession of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method by an Athlete Support Personnel without valid justification may result in charge of misconduct under IPCA’s [disciplinary rules.

ARTICLE 23: ACCEPTANCE, COMPLIANCE AND MODIFICATION

23.1 Acceptance of the Code

23.1.1 The following entities shall be Signatories accepting the Code: WADA, the International Olympic Committee, International Federations, the International Paralympic Committee, National Olympic Committees, National Paralympic Committees, Major Event Organizations, and National Anti-Doping Organizations. These entities shall accept the Code by signing a declaration of acceptance upon approval by each of their respective governing bodies.

[Comment to Article 23.1.1: Each accepting Signatory will separately sign an identical copy of the standard form common declaration of acceptance and deliver it to WADA. The act of acceptance will be as authorized by the organic documents of each organization. For example, an International Federation by its Congress and WADA by its Foundation Board.]

23.1.2 Other sport organizations that may not be under the control of a Signatory may, upon WADA’s invitation, also become a Signatory by accepting the Code.

[Comment to Article 23.1.2: Those professional leagues that are not currently under the jurisdiction of any government or International Federation will be encouraged to accept the Code.]

23.1.3 A list of all acceptances will be made public by WADA.

23.2 Implementation of the Code

23.2.1 The Signatories shall implement applicable Code provisions through policies, statutes, rules or regulations according to their authority and within their relevant spheres of responsibility.

23.2.2 The following Articles as applicable to the scope of the anti-doping activity which the Anti-Doping Organization performs must be implemented by Signatories without substantive change (allowing for any non-substantive changes to the language in order to refer to the organization’s name, sport, section numbers, etc.):

• Article 1 (Definition of Doping)

• Article 2 (Anti-Doping Rule Violations)

• Article 3 (Proof of Doping)

• Article 4.2.2 (Specified Substances)

• Article 4.3 (WADA’s Determination of the Prohibited List)

• Article 7.7 (Retirement from Sport)

• Article 9 (Automatic Disqualification of Individual Results)

• Article 10 (Sanctions on Individuals)

• Article 11 (Consequences to Teams)

• Article 13 (Appeals)

• Article 15.1 (Recognition of Decisions)

• Article 17 (Statute of Limitations)

• Article 21 (Interpretation of the Code)

• Appendix 1 – Definitions

No additional provision may be added to a Signatory’s rules which changes the effect of the Articles enumerated in this Article. A Signatory’s rules must expressly acknowledge the Commentary of the Code and endow the Commentary with the same status that it has in the Code.

[Comment to Article 23.2.2: Nothing in the Code precludes an Anti-Doping Organization from adopting and enforcing its own specific disciplinary rules for conduct by Athlete Support Personnel related to doping but which does not, in and of itself, constitute an anti-doping rule violation under the Code. For example, a National or International Federation could refuse to renew the license of a coach when multiple Athletes have committed anti-doping rule violations while under that coach’s supervision.]

23.2.3 In implementing the Code, the Signatories are encouraged to use the

No additional provision may be added to a Signatory’s rules which changes the effect of the Articles enumerated in this Article. A Signatory’s rules must expressly acknowledge the Commentary of the Code and endow the Commentary with the same status that it has in the Code.

[Comment to Article 23.2.3: Nothing in the Code precludes an Anti-Doping Organization from adopting and enforcing its own specific disciplinary rules for conduct by Athlete Support Personnel related to doping but which does not, in and of itself, constitute an anti-doping rule violation under the Code. For example, a National or International Federation could refuse to renew the license of a coach when multiple Athletes have committed anti-doping rule violations while under that coach’s supervision.]

23.2.3 In implementing the Code, the Signatories are encouraged to use the models of best practice recommended by WADA.

23.3 Implementation of Anti-Doping Programs.

Signatories shall devote sufficient resources in order to implement anti-doping programs in all areas that are compliant with the Code and the International Standards.

23.4 Compliance with the Code.

Signatories shall not be considered in compliance with the Code until they have accepted and implemented the Code in accordance with Articles 23.1, 23.2, and 23.3. They shall no longer be considered in compliance once acceptance has been withdrawn.

23.5 Monitoring and Enforcing Compliance with the Code.

23.5.1 Compliance by Signatories with the Code and the International Standards shall be monitored by WADA in accordance with the International Standard for Code Compliance by Signatories.

23.5.2 To facilitate such monitoring, each Signatory shall report to WADA on its compliance with the Code and the International Standards as and when required by WADA. As part of that reporting, the Signatory shall provide accurately all of the information requested by WADA and shall explain the actions it is taking to correct any non-conformities.

23.5.3 Failure by a Signatory to provide accurate information in accordance with Article 23.5.2 itself constitutes an instance of non-conformity with the Code, as does failure by a Signatory to submit accurate information to WADA where required by other Articles of the Code or by the International Standard for Code Compliance by Signatories.

23.5.4 In cases of non-conformity (whether with reporting obligations or otherwise), WADA shall follow the corrective procedures set out in the International Standard for Code Compliance by Signatories. If the Signatory fails to correct the non-conformity within the specified timeframe, then (following approval of such course by WADA’s Executive Committee) WADA shall send a formal notice to the Signatory, asserting that the Signatory is non-compliant, specifying the consequences that WADA proposes should apply for such non- compliance, and specifying the conditions that WADA proposes the Signatory should have to satisfy in order to be reinstated to the list of Code-compliant Signatories. That notice will be publicly reported in accordance with the International Standard for Code Compliance by Signatories.

23.5.5 If the Signatory does not dispute WADA’s assertion of non-compliance or the consequences or reinstatement conditions proposed by WADA within twenty-one days of receipt of the formal notice, the assertion will be deemed admitted and the consequences and reinstatement conditions will be deemed accepted, the notice will automatically become a final decision, and (subject only to any appeal filed in accordance with Article 13.6) it will be enforceable with immediate effect in accordance with Article 23.5.9. The decision will be publicly reported as provided in the International Standard for Code Compliance by Signatories.

23.5.6 If the Signatory wishes to dispute WADA’s assertion of non-compliance, and/or the consequences and/or the reinstatement conditions proposed by WADA, it must notify WADA in writing within twenty-one days of its receipt of the notice from WADA. WADA shall then file a formal notice of dispute with CAS and that dispute will be resolved by the CAS Ordinary Arbitration Division in accordance with the International Standard for Code Compliance by Signatories. WADA shall have the burden of proving, on the balance of probabilities, that the Signatory is non-compliant. If the CAS Panel decides that WADA has met that burden, and if the Signatory has also disputed the consequences and/or the reinstatement conditions proposed by WADA, the CAS Panel will also consider, by reference to the relevant provisions of the International Standard for Code Compliance by Signatories, what consequences should be imposed and/or what conditions the Signatory should be required to satisfy in order to be reinstated.

23.5.7 WADA will publicly report the fact that the case has been referred to CAS for determination. Each of the following Persons shall have the right to intervene and participate as a party in the case, provided it gives notice of its intervention within 10 days of such publication by WADA: (a) the International Olympic Committee and/or the International Paralympic Committee (as applicable), and the National Olympic Committee and/or the National Paralympic Committee (as applicable), where the decision may have an effect in relation to the Olympic Games or Paralympic Games (including decisions affecting eligibility to attend/participate in the Olympic Games or Paralympic Games); and (b) an International Federation, where the decision may have an effect on participation in the International Federation’s World Championships/ International Events and/or on a bid that has been submitted for a country to host the International Federation’s World Championships. Any other Person wishing to participate as a party in the case must apply to CAS within 10 days of publication by WADA of the fact that the case has been referred to CAS for determination. CAS shall permit such intervention (i) if all other parties in the case agree; or (ii) if the applying Person demonstrates a sufficient legal interest in the outcome of the case to justify its participation as a party.

23.5.8 CAS’s decision resolving the dispute will be publicly reported by CAS and by WADA. Subject to the right under Swiss law to challenge that decision before the Swiss Federal Tribunal, the decision shall be final and enforceable with immediate effect in accordance with Article 23.5.9.

23.5.9 The following decisions are applicable worldwide, and shall be recognized, respected and given full effect by all other Signatories in accordance with their authority and within their respective spheres of responsibility: (a) final decisions issued in accordance with Article 23.5.5 (subject to any appeal under Article 13.6) or Article 23.5.8, determining that a Signatory is non-compliant, and/or imposing consequences for such non-compliance, and/or setting conditions that the Signatory has to satisfy in order to be reinstated to the list of Code-compliant Signatories; and (b) final decisions issued in accordance with Article 23.5.10, determining that a Signatory has not yet met all of the reinstatement conditions imposed on it and therefore is not yet entitled to be reinstated to the list of Code-compliant Signatories.

23.5.10 If a Signatory wishes to dispute WADA’s assertion that the Signatory has not yet met all of the reinstatement conditions imposed on it and therefore is not yet entitled to be reinstated to the list of Code- compliant Signatories, the Signatory must file a formal notice of dispute with CAS (with a copy to WADA) within twenty-one days of its receipt of the assertion from WADA. The dispute will be resolved by the CAS Ordinary Arbitration Division in accordance with Articles 23.5.6 to 23.5.8. It will be WADA’s burden to prove on the balance of probabilities that the Signatory has not yet met all of the reinstatement conditions imposed on it and therefore is not yet entitled to be reinstated.

23.6 Monitoring Compliance with the UNESCO Convention

Compliance with the commitments reflected in the UNESCO Convention will be monitored as determined by the Conference of Parties to the UNESCO Convention, following consultation with the State Parties and WADA. WADA shall advise governments on the implementation of the Code by the Signatories and shall advise Signatories on the ratification, acceptance, approval or accession to the UNESCO Convention by governments.

APPENDIX 1: DEFINITIONS

ADAMS: The Anti-Doping Administration and Management System is a Web-based database management tool for data entry, storage, sharing, and reporting designed to assist stakeholders and WADA in their Anti-Doping operations in conjunction with data protection legislation.

Administration: Providing, supplying, supervising, facilitating, or otherwise participating in the Use or Attempted Use by another Person of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method. However, this definition shall not include the actions of bona fide medical personnel involving a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method used for genuine and legal therapeutic purposes or other acceptable justification and shall not include actions involving Prohibited Substances which are not prohibited in Out-of-Competition Testing unless the circumstances as a whole demonstrate that such Prohibited Substances are not intended for genuine and legal therapeutic purposes or are intended to enhance sport performance.

Adverse Analytical Finding: A report from a WADA-accredited laboratory or other WADA-approved laboratory that, consistent with the International Standard for Laboratories and related Technical Documents, identifies in a Sample the presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers (including elevated quantities of endogenous substances) or evidence of the Use of a Prohibited Method.

Adverse Passport Finding: A report identified as an Adverse Passport Finding as described in the applicable International Standards.

Anti-Doping Organization (ADO): A Signatory that is responsible for adopting rules for initiating, implementing or enforcing any part of the Doping Control process. This includes, for example, the International Olympic Committee, the International Paralympic Committee, other Major Event Organizations that conduct Testing at their Events, WADA, International Federations, and National Anti-Doping Organizations.

Athlete: Any Person who competes in sport at the international level (as defined by each International Federation), or the national level (as defined by each National Anti-Doping Organization). An Anti-Doping Organization has discretion to apply anti-doping rules to an Athlete who is neither an International-Level Athlete nor a National-Level Athlete, and thus to bring them within the definition of “Athlete.” In relation to Athletes who are neither International-Level nor National-Level Athletes, an Anti-Doping Organization may elect to: conduct limited Testing or no Testing at all; analyze Samples for less than the full menu of Prohibited Substances; require limited or no whereabouts information; or not require advance TUEs. However, if an Article 2.1, 2.3 or 2.5 anti-doping rule violation is committed by any Athlete over whom an Anti-Doping Organization has authority who competes below the international or national level, then the Consequences set forth in the Code (except Article 14.3.2) must be applied. For purposes of Article 2.8 and Article 2.9 and for purposes of anti-doping information and education, any Person who participates in sport under the authority of any Signatory, government, or other sports organization accepting the Code is an Athlete.

[Comment: This definition makes it clear that all International- and National-Level Athletes are subject to the anti-doping rules of the Code, with the precise definitions of international- and national-level sport to be set forth in the anti-doping rules of the International Federations and National Anti-Doping Organizations, respectively. The definition also allows each National Anti-Doping Organization, if it chooses to do so, to expand its anti-doping program beyond International- or National-Level Athletes to competitors at lower levels of Competition or to individuals who engage in fitness activities but do not compete at all. Thus, a National Anti-Doping Organization could, for example, elect to test recreational-level competitors but not require advance TUEs. But an anti-doping rule violation involving an Adverse Analytical Finding or Tampering results in all of the Consequences provided for in the Code (with the exception of Article 14.3.2). The decision on whether Consequences apply to recreational-level Athletes who engage in fitness activities but never compete is left to the National Anti-Doping Organization. In the same manner, a Major Event Organization holding an Event only for masters-level competitors could elect to test the competitors but not analyze Samples for the full menu of Prohibited Substances. Competitors at all levels of Competition should receive the benefit of anti- doping information and education.]

Athlete Biological Passport: The program and methods of gathering and collating data as described in the International Standard for Testing and Investigations and International Standard for Laboratories.

Athlete Support Personnel: Any coach, trainer, manager, agent, team staff, official, medical or paramedical personnel, parent or any other Person working with or treating or assisting an Athlete participating in or preparing for sports Competition.

Attempt: Purposely engaging in conduct that constitutes a substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in the commission of an anti-doping rule violation. Provided, however, there shall be no anti-doping rule violation based solely on an Attempt to commit a violation if the Person renounces the Attempt prior to it being discovered by a third party not involved in the Attempt.

Atypical Finding: A report from a WADA-laboratory or other WADA-approved laboratory which requires further investigation as provided by the International Standard for Laboratories or related Technical Documents prior to the determination of an Adverse Analytical Finding.

Atypical Passport Finding: A report described as an Atypical Passport Finding as described in the applicable International Standards.

CAS: The Court of Arbitration for Sport.

Code: The IPCA Anti-Doping Code.

Competition: A single race, match, game or singular sport contest. For example, a basketball game or the finals of the Olympic 100-meter race in athletics. For stage races and other sport contests where prizes are awarded on a daily or other interim basis the distinction between a Competition and an Event will be as provided in the rules of the applicable International Federation. A series of individual Events conducted together under one ruling body (e.g. The IPCA World Chess Championsips)

Consequences of Anti-Doping Rules Violations (“Consequences”): An Athlete’s or other Person’s violation of an anti-doping rule may result in one or more of the following : (a) Disqualification means the Athlete’s results in a particular Competition or Event are invalidated, with all resulting Consequences including forfeiture of any medals, points and prizes ; (b) Ineligibility means the Athlete or other Person is barred on account of an anti- doping rule violation for a specified period of time from participating in any Competition or other activity or funding as provided in Article 10.12.1 of the WADC; and (c) Provisional Suspension means the Athlete or other Person is barred temporarily from participating in any Competition or activity prior to the final decision at a hearing conducted under Art. 8 (Hearings); (d) Financial Consequences means a financial sanction imposed for an anti-doping rule violation or to recover costs associated with an anti-doping rule violation; and (e) Public Disclosure or Public Reporting means the dissemination or distribution of information to the general public or Persons beyond those Persons entitled to earlier notification in accordance with Article 14. Teams in Team Sports may also be subjecet to Consequences as provided in Article 11 of the WADC.

The IPCA: International Physically Disabled Chess association

The IPCA Anti-Doping Committee: The Committee responsible for establishing policies, guidelines and procedures with respect to the fight against doping, including Results managements and compliance with internationally accepted regulations, including the WADC.

The IPCA Anti-Doping Committee Chairperson: he is represented by the Anti-Doping Officer, Person appointed by IPCA Presidential Board.

The IPCA Therapeutic Use Exemption Committee (TUEC): The panel designed by the IPCA Anti-Doping Officer to assess all Therapeutic Use Exemptions.

Disqualification: See Consequences of Anti-Doping Rules Violations.

Doping Control: All steps and processes from test distribution planning through to ultimate disposition of any appeal including all steps and processes in between such as provision of whereabouts information, Sample collection and handling, laboratory analysis, Therapeutic use Exemptions, results management and hearings.

Event: A series of individual Competitions conducted together under one ruling body

Event Venues: Those venues so designated by the ruling body for the Event.

Event Period: The time between the beginning and end of an Event, as established by the ruling body of the Event.

Fault: Fault is any breach of duty or any lack of care appropriate to a particular situation. Factors to be taken into consideration in assessing an Athlete or other Person’s degree of Fault include, for example, the Athlete’s or other Person’s experience, whether the Athlete or other Person is a Minor, special considerations such as impairment, the degree of risk that should have been perceived by the Athlete and the level of care and investigation exercised by the Athlete in relation to what should have been the perceived level of risk. In assessing the Athlete’s or other Person’s degree of Fault, the circumstances considered must be specific and relevant to explain the Athlete’s or other Person’s departure from the expected standard of behavior. Thus, for example, the fact that an Athlete would lose the opportunity to earn large sums of money during a period of Ineligibility, or the fact that the Athlete only has a short time left in his or her career, or the timing of the sporting calendar, would not be relevant factors to be considered in reducing the period of Ineligibility under Article 10.5.1 or 10.5.2.

[Comment: The criteria for assessing an Athlete’s degree of Fault is the same under all Articles where Fault is to be considered. However, under Article 10.5.2, no reduction of sanction is appropriate unless, when the degree of Fault is assessed, the conclusion is that No Significant Fault or Negligence on the part of the Athlete or other Person was involved.]

Financial Consequences: see Consequences of Anti-Doping Rule Violations, above.

In-Competition: Unless provided otherwise in the rules of an International Federation or other relevant Anti- Doping Organization, “In-Competition” means the period commencing twelve hours before a Competition in which the Athlete is scheduled to participate through the end of such Competition and the Sample collection process related to such Competition.

Independent Observer Programme: A team of observers, under the supervision of WADA, who observe and may provide guidance on the Doping Control process at certain Events and report on their observations.

Individual Sport: Any Sport that is not a Team Sport.

Ineligibility: See Consequences of Anti-Doping Rules Violations.

Internal Appeal: An Appeal conducted by the IPCA, lodged due to a decision taken as a result of an Expedited Hearing.

Internal Appeal Hearing: Hearing held as a result of an Internal Appeal with or without the requirement for a B Sample Analysis.

International Events: A Competition where the IPCA or another international sport organization is the ruling body for the Event or appoints the technical officials for the Event.

International-Level Athlete: Athletes who compete in sport at the international level, as defined by each International Federation, consistent with the International Standard for Testing and Investigations.

International Standard: A standard adopted by WADA in support of the WADC. Compliance with an International Standard (as opposed to another alternative standard, practice or procedure) shall be sufficient to conclude that the procedures addressed by the International Standard were performed properly. International Standards shall include any Technical Documents issued pursuant to the International Standard.

Major Event Organizations: This term refers to the continental associations of international multi-sport organizations that function as the ruling body for any continental, regional or other International Event.

Marker: A compound, group of compounds or biological parameters that indicates the Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.

Metabolite: Any substance produced by a biotransformation process.

Minor: A natural Person who has not reached the age of eighteen years.

National Anti-Doping Organization: The entity (ies) designated by each country as possessing the primary authority and responsibility to adopt and implement anti-doping rules, direct the collection of Samples, the management of test results, and the conduct of hearings, all at the national level. It this designation has not been made by the competent public authority (ies), the entity shall be the country’s National Olympic Committee, National Paralympic Committee or its designee.

National Event: A sport Event or Competition involving International- or National-Level Athletes that is not an International Event.

National-Level Athlete: Athletes who compete in sport at the national level, as defined by each National Anti- Doping Organization, consistent with the International Standard for Testing and Investigations.

National Olympic Committee: The organization recognized by the International Olympic Committee. The term National Olympic Committee shall also include the National Sport Confederation in those countries where the National Sport Confederation assumes typical National Olympic Committee responsibilities in the anti-doping area

National Paralympic Committee: The organization recognized by the International Paralympic Committee. The term National Paralympic Committee shall also include the National Sport Confederation in those countries where the National Sport Confederation assumes typical National Paralympic Committee responsibilities in the anti-doping area

National Sport Organization: The organization recognized by the IPCA as the national governing body for Athletes with cerebral palsy, traumatic brain injury, stroke or similar conditions.

No Fault or Negligence: The Athlete or other Person’s establishing that he or she did not know or suspect, and could not reasonably have known or suspected even with the exercise of utmost caution, that he or she had Used or been administered the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method or otherwise violated an anti- doping rule. Except in the case of a Minor, for any violation of Article 2.1, the Athlete must also establish how the Prohibited Substance entered his or her system.

No Significant Fault or Negligence: The Athlete or other Persons establishing that his or her Fault or negligence, when viewed in the totality of the circumstances and taking into account the criteria for No Fault or Negligence, was not significant in relationship to the anti-doping rule violation. Except in the case of a Minor, for any violation of Article 2.1, the Athlete must also establish how the Prohibited Substance entered his or her system.

[Comment: For Cannabinoids, an Athlete may establish No Significant Fault or Negligence by clearly demonstrating that the context of the Use was unrelated to sport performance.]

Out-of-Competition: Any period which is not In-Competition.

Participant: Any Athlete or Athlete Support Personnel.

Person: A natural Person or an organization or other entity.

Possession: The actual, physical Possession, or the constructive Possession (which shall be found only The IPCA the Person has exclusive control over the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method or the premises in which a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method exists). Provided, however, if the Person does not have exclusive control over the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method or the premises in which a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method exists, constructive Possession shall only be found if the Person knew about the presence of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method and intended to exercise control over it. Provided, however, there shall be no Anti-Doping Rule Violation based solely on Possession if, prior to receiving notification of any kind that the Person has committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation, the Person has taken concrete action demonstrating that the Person never intended to have Possession and has renounced Possession by explicitly declaring it to an Anti-Doping Organization. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this definition, the purchase (including by any electronic or other means) of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method constitutes Possession by the Person who makes the purchase.

[Comment: Under this definition, steroids found in an Athlete’s car would constitute a violation unless the Athlete establishes that someone else used the car; in that event, the Anti-Doping Organization must establish that, even though the Athlete did not have exclusive control over the car, the Athlete knew about the steroids and intended to have control over the steroids. Similarly, in the example of steroids found in a home medicine cabinet under the joint control of an Athlete and spouse, the Anti-Doping Organization must establish that the Athlete knew the steroids were in the cabinet and that the Athlete intended to exercise control over the steroids. The act of purchasing a Prohibited Substance alone constitutes Possession, even where, for example, the product does not arrive, is received by someone else, or is sent to a third party address]

Prohibited List: The WADC List identifying the Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods.

Prohibited Method: Any method so described on the Prohibited List

Prohibited Substance: Any substance so described on the Prohibited List

Provisional Hearing: For purposes of Article 7.2, an expedited abbreviated hearing occurring prior to a hearing under Article 8 (Right to a Fait Hearing) that provides the Athlete with notice and an opportunity to be heard in either written or oral form.

[Comment: A Provisional Hearing is only a preliminary proceeding which may not involve a full review of the facts of the case. Following a Provisional Hearing, the Athlete remains entitled to a subsequent full hearing on the merits of the case. By contrast, an “expedited hearing,” as that term is used in Article 7.9 of the WADC, is a full hearing on the merits conducted on an expedited time schedule.]

Provisional Suspension: See Consequences of Anti-Doping Rule Violations above.

Publicly Disclose: To disseminate or distribute information to the general public or Persons beyond those Persons entitled to earlier notification in accordance with Article 13.

Regional Anti-Doping Organization: A regional entity designated by member countries to coordinate and manage delegated areas of their national anti-doping programs, which may include the adoption and implementation of anti-doping rules, the planning and collection of Samples, the management of results, the review of TUEs, the conduct of hearings, and the conduct of educational programs at a regional level.

Registered Testing Pool: The pool of highest-priority Athletes established separately at the international level by International Federations and at the national level by National Anti-Doping Organizations, who are subject to focused In-Competition and Out-of-Competition Testing as part of that International Federation’s or National Anti-Doping Organization’s test distribution plan and therefore are required to provide whereabouts information as provided in Article 5.6 of the Code and the International Standard for Testing and Investigations.

Result: The information obtained from the Doping Control test.

Sample/Specimen: Any biological material collected for the purposes of Doping Control

[Comment: It has sometimes been claimed that the collection of blood Samples violates the tenets of certain religious or cultural groups. It has been determined that there is no basis for any such claim.]

Signatories: Those entities signing the Code and agreeing to comply with the Code, as provided in Article 23 of the WADC.

Specified Substance: See Article 4.2.2 of the WADC.

Strict Liability: The rule which provides that under Article 2.1 and Article 2.2, it is not necessary that intent, Fault, negligence, or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated by the Anti-Doping Organization in order to establish an anti-doping rule violation.

Sanctioned Competition: A Competition that meets the appropriate organizational and technical requirements of the IPCA

Substantial Assistance: For purposes of Article 10.5.3, a Person providing Substantial Assistance must: (1) fully disclose in a signed written statement all information he or she possesses in relation to Anti-Doping Rule Violations, and (2) fully co-operate with the investigation and adjudication of any case related to that information, including, for example, presenting testimony at a hearing if requested to do so by an Anti-Doping Organization or hearing body. Further, the information provided must be credible and must comprise an important part of any case which is initiated or, if no case is initiated must have provided a sufficient basis on which a case could have been brought.

Tampering: Altering for an improper purpose or in an improper way; bringing improper influence to bear; interfering improperly; obstructing, misleading or engaging in any fraudulent conduct to alter Results or prevent normal procedures from occurring.

Target Testing: Selection of specific Athletes for Testing based on criteria set forth in the International Standard for Testing and Investigations.

Team: A Team is a combination of participants playing as one entity in a sport.

Team sport: A sport in which the substitution of players is permitted during a Competition.

Testing: The parts of the Doping Control process involving test distribution planning. Sample collection, Sample handling, and Sample transport to the laboratory.

Therapeutic Use Exemption: An exemption to use for therapeutic purposes Substances on the WADC Prohibited List as described in Article 4.4 of the WADC.

Trafficking: Selling, giving, transporting, sending, delivering or distributing (or Possessing for any such purpose) a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method (either physically or by any electronic or other means) by an Athlete, Athlete Support Personnel or any other Person subject to the jurisdiction of an Anti- Doping Organization to any third party; provided, however, this definition shall not include the actions of bona fide medical Personnel involving a Prohibited Substance used for genuine and legal therapeutic purposes or other acceptable justification, and shall not include actions involving Prohibited Substances which are not prohibited in Out-of-Competition Testing unless the circumstances as a whole demonstrate such Prohibited Substances are not intended for genuine and legal therapeutic purposes or are intended to enhance sport performance.

UNESCO Convention: The International Convention against Doping in Sport adopted by the 33rd session of the UNESCO General Conference on 19 October, 2005 including any and all amendments adopted by the States Parties to the Convention and the Conference of Parties to the International Convention against Doping in Sport.

Use: the utilization, application, ingestion, injection or consumption by any means whatsoever of any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.

WADA: The World Anti-Doping Agency.

WADC: The world Anti-Doping Code.

[Comment: Defined terms shall include their plural and possessive forms, as well as those terms used as other parts of speech].

© Ipca.online, 2018