加拿大自行车运动员兴奋剂违规案的法律思考
|
摘要
对加拿大自行车运动员杰克·伯克(Jack Burke)兴奋剂违规的体育仲裁案件进行分析,从双方的争议点出发,结合处罚结果进行拓展讨论,从上诉期限的起算、运动员过错的认定以及举证过程中的证明标准和反兴奋剂教育培训义务等角度分析本案在法学方面的意义。本案启示在于:对国际自行车联盟(UCI)以及世界反兴奋剂机构(WADA)来说,上诉期限应当以"完整决定"为起算点,对"无过错或无疏忽"的认定要从严把握,同时应当保留"完全满意"的证明标准,完善对年轻运动员反兴奋剂培训的规定。对运动员来说,其良好的个人品质对于支持自己的主张,以及确定是否构成违规有重要帮助,运动员时刻需做好针对兴奋剂的合理防范措施。最后,文章结合本案对我国的反兴奋剂规则的修订给出了改进建议。
The paper analyzes the sports arbitration case of the doping violation of Jack Burke, a Canadian cyclist. Based on the points of contention of the both sides, it starts an extended discussion on the result of the penalty. It discusses the legal significance of the case from the aspects of the commencement of the period for appeal, the identification of the athlete's fault, the proof standard in the process of proof and the training obligation of anti-doping education. The revelation of the case lies in the following: As to UCI and WADA, "complete decision" should be the starting point of the appeal period. The identification of "no fault or no negligence" should be strictly grasped. The proof standard of "full satisfaction" should be retained. And the regulations on anti-doping training for young athletes should be perfected. As to an athlete, his good personal quality will be of great help to his claim and in the process of judging whether the violation is established.Athlete should arrange appropriate precautionary measures against doping. Based on the case, the paper puts forward some suggestions for bring China's anti-doping regulations to completion.
The paper analyzes the sports arbitration case of the doping violation of Jack Burke, a Canadian cyclist. Based on the points of contention of the both sides, it starts an extended discussion on the result of the penalty. It discusses the legal significance of the case from the aspects of the commencement of the period for appeal, the identification of the athlete's fault, the proof standard in the process of proof and the training obligation of anti-doping education. The revelation of the case lies in the following: As to UCI and WADA, "complete decision" should be the starting point of the appeal period. The identification of "no fault or no negligence" should be strictly grasped. The proof standard of "full satisfaction" should be retained. And the regulations on anti-doping training for young athletes should be perfected. As to an athlete, his good personal quality will be of great help to his claim and in the process of judging whether the violation is established.Athlete should arrange appropriate precautionary measures against doping. Based on the case, the paper puts forward some suggestions for bring China's anti-doping regulations to completion.
引文
[1]百度百科:“HCTZ”词条[EB/OL].(2018-05-30)[2018-06-06].https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E6%B0%A2%E6%B0%AF%E5%99%BB%E5%97%AA/3209533?fr=aladdin.
[2]UCI Cycling Regulations-Part 14 Anti-Doping[EB/OL](2009-12-03)[2018-5-30].http://d3epuodzu3wuis.cloudfront.net/UCI+Anti-Doping+Rules+2009-12-03.pdf.
[3]郭树理.体育纠纷的多元化救济机制探讨---比较法与国际私法的视野[M].北京:法律出版社,2004:29,335.
[4]王蓉.体育仲裁中的临时措施探讨[D].湘潭大学,2009
[5]IOC Executive Board to appeal CAS decisions on Russian cases[EB/OL].(2018-05-03)[2018-05-30].http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/ioc-executive-board-appealcas-decisions-russian-cases/.
[6]The Court Of Arbitration For Sport(CAS)delivers its decisions in the matter of 39 Russian athletes v/the IOC:28 appeals upheld,11 partially upheld[EB/OL].[2018-05-30].http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Media_Release__decision_RUS_IOC_.pdf.
[7]CAS 2011/A/2645.UCI v.Alexander Kolobnev&Russian Cycling Federation[EB/OL].[2018-05-30].http://jurisprudence.tas-cas.org/Shared%20Documents/2645.pdf.
[8]CAS.CAS 2017/A/5280 Danis Zaripov v.International Ice Hockey Federation[EB/OL].[2018-05-30].http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Consent_Award_5280_internet.pdf.
[9]黄世席.比例原则在兴奋剂违规处罚中的适用[J].天津体育学院学报,2013,28(2):162-166.
[10]周青山,宋彬龄.国际体育仲裁院新近案例研究[M].湖南:湘潭大学出版社,2017:237.
[11]罗玉珍.民事证明制度与理论[M].北京:法律出版社,2003:629.
[12]苏力.解释的难题:对几种法律文本解释方法的追问[J].中国社会科学,1997,(4):11-32.
[13]叶卫兵,苑亮,吕俊.非药检阳性兴奋剂案件的举证责任和证明标准[J].天津体育学院学报,2015,25(2):101-103.
[14]Jack Burke Personal Information.[EB/OL].[2018-05-30].https://www.procyclingstats.com/rider.php?id=170830&season=2012.
[15]郭树理.运动员兴奋剂违纪重大过错的认定-以莎拉波娃案为例[J].武汉体育学院学报,2017,51(4):50-60.
[16]宋彬龄.论兴奋剂案件中过错程度的证明[J].体育科学,2012,32(7):71-77.
[17]CAS arbitration N CAS OG 06/001[EB/OL].[2018-05-30].http://jurisprudence.tascas.org/Shared%20Documents/OG%2006-001.pdf.
[18]北京晚报.张文秀219天换来清白运动员维权可以举证质疑[EB/OL].(2015-05-08)[2018-07-06].http://www.chinanews.com/ty/2015/05-08/7262909.shtml.
[2]UCI Cycling Regulations-Part 14 Anti-Doping[EB/OL](2009-12-03)[2018-5-30].http://d3epuodzu3wuis.cloudfront.net/UCI+Anti-Doping+Rules+2009-12-03.pdf.
[3]郭树理.体育纠纷的多元化救济机制探讨---比较法与国际私法的视野[M].北京:法律出版社,2004:29,335.
[4]王蓉.体育仲裁中的临时措施探讨[D].湘潭大学,2009
[5]IOC Executive Board to appeal CAS decisions on Russian cases[EB/OL].(2018-05-03)[2018-05-30].http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/ioc-executive-board-appealcas-decisions-russian-cases/.
[6]The Court Of Arbitration For Sport(CAS)delivers its decisions in the matter of 39 Russian athletes v/the IOC:28 appeals upheld,11 partially upheld[EB/OL].[2018-05-30].http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Media_Release__decision_RUS_IOC_.pdf.
[7]CAS 2011/A/2645.UCI v.Alexander Kolobnev&Russian Cycling Federation[EB/OL].[2018-05-30].http://jurisprudence.tas-cas.org/Shared%20Documents/2645.pdf.
[8]CAS.CAS 2017/A/5280 Danis Zaripov v.International Ice Hockey Federation[EB/OL].[2018-05-30].http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Consent_Award_5280_internet.pdf.
[9]黄世席.比例原则在兴奋剂违规处罚中的适用[J].天津体育学院学报,2013,28(2):162-166.
[10]周青山,宋彬龄.国际体育仲裁院新近案例研究[M].湖南:湘潭大学出版社,2017:237.
[11]罗玉珍.民事证明制度与理论[M].北京:法律出版社,2003:629.
[12]苏力.解释的难题:对几种法律文本解释方法的追问[J].中国社会科学,1997,(4):11-32.
[13]叶卫兵,苑亮,吕俊.非药检阳性兴奋剂案件的举证责任和证明标准[J].天津体育学院学报,2015,25(2):101-103.
[14]Jack Burke Personal Information.[EB/OL].[2018-05-30].https://www.procyclingstats.com/rider.php?id=170830&season=2012.
[15]郭树理.运动员兴奋剂违纪重大过错的认定-以莎拉波娃案为例[J].武汉体育学院学报,2017,51(4):50-60.
[16]宋彬龄.论兴奋剂案件中过错程度的证明[J].体育科学,2012,32(7):71-77.
[17]CAS arbitration N CAS OG 06/001[EB/OL].[2018-05-30].http://jurisprudence.tascas.org/Shared%20Documents/OG%2006-001.pdf.
[18]北京晚报.张文秀219天换来清白运动员维权可以举证质疑[EB/OL].(2015-05-08)[2018-07-06].http://www.chinanews.com/ty/2015/05-08/7262909.shtml.