期刊文献+

比例原则在兴奋剂违规处罚中的适用 被引量:14

Application of the Principle of Proportionality in the Doping-Related Cases
下载PDF
导出
摘要 比例原则是兴奋剂违规处罚中必须遵守的一项基本原则,世界反兴奋剂机构及其他反兴奋剂组织都应当遵守该原则。除非存在特殊情况,对兴奋剂违规行为的处罚必须与有关事实(当事人过错程度及具体案情等)成比例,否则会导致司法介入问题。法学专家意见、体育仲裁院裁决以及瑞士联邦法院判决表明:尽管根据比例原则所实施的处罚可能会在一定程度上有侵犯当事人基本权益的嫌疑,但却是体育运动公共利益及兴奋剂规制的全球统一所必须的,比例原则的适用并不侵犯相关当事人所享有的基本人权。 The principle of proportionality is one of the fundamental principles in the fight against doping in sports.The anti-doping institution of the world and other anti-doping organizations should obey this principle.Except in special circumstances,the punishment against doping-related cases should adhere to this principle.By the way,some legal experts,CAS awards and Swiss Federal Court awards had pointed out that,although the punishment and its procedure against doping-related athletes may have the suspect of infringing the athletes’ fundamental human rights,it is helpful for the public policy and harmonization of doping regulations in the sports arena.The application of proportionality does not infringe doping-related athletes’ human rights.
作者 黄世席
机构地区 山东大学法学院
出处 《天津体育学院学报》 CAS CSSCI 北大核心 2013年第2期162-166,共5页 Journal of Tianjin University of Sport
基金 国家体育总局体育社会科学研究项目(项目编号:1617SS11025)
关键词 比例原则 兴奋剂 违规处罚 基本人权 the principle of proportionality doping doping-related punishment human rights
  • 相关文献

参考文献23

  • 1CAS. 2011/A/2658: BOA v. WADA [EB/OL]. [2012- 12- 27]. http: //www.tas- cas.org/recent- decision, para.8.29.
  • 2CAS. 2011/O/2422: USOC v. IOC [EB/OL]. [2012- 12- 27]. http://www. tas- eas.org/reeent- decision, paras.8.23-8.27.
  • 3JANWILLEM S. The Strict Liability Principles and The Human Rights of Athletes in Doping Cases [M]. Hague, the Netherlands: TMC Asser Press, 2006.
  • 4CAS. 2012/A/2807 dr 2808:A1 Eid dr Sharbatly v. FEI [EB/OL].[2012- 12- 27]. http://www.tas- cas.org/recent-decision, paras.6.16-6.17.
  • 5ANTONIO R , GABRIELLE K K , GIORGIO M . Doping and Fundamental Rights of Athletes: Comments in The Wake of The Adoption of The World Anti-Doping Code [J]. International Sports Law Review, 2003 ( 3 ) : 39-67.
  • 6CAS. 2005/C/976 & 986: FIFA & WADA[EB/OL]. [2012- 12- 27]. http: //www.tas- cas.org/reeent- decision, para. 124.
  • 7CAS. 2010/A/2307: WADA v. Jobson, CBF and STJD [EB/OL]. [2012- 12- 27]. http://www.tas- cas.org/recent- decision, para.131.
  • 8ECJ. Case C-519/04P Meca-Medina and Majcen v. Commission[J]. C.M.L. R, 2006,18:47- 55.
  • 9ROMANO S . The Adoption and Enforcement of Anti-doping Rules Should Not Be Subject to European Competition Law [J]. European Competition Law Review, 2010, 31(8): 323-330.
  • 10MCLAREN R.CAS Doping Jurisprudence: What Can We Learn [J]. International Sports Law Review,2006( 1 ) : 4-22.

同被引文献114

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部