期刊文献+

论反兴奋剂国际体育仲裁中的运动员程序保护 被引量:3

Athletes' Procedural Protection in Anti-doping International Sports Arbitration
原文传递
导出
摘要 尽管使用兴奋剂以获得比赛竞争优势的行为,属于诈骗行为的范畴,《世界反兴奋剂条例》却一直受到法学界的质疑,因为其对运动员的处罚主要表现为剥夺运动员一定期限的比赛资格,属于刑事处罚中职业禁止的范畴,但其适用的却是仲裁程序;所以,在当前法律框架下,如何在程序上保护运动员的权利,就成了一个不能回避的问题。从规范分析法和社会关系分析法的角度看,当前惩罚性的兴奋剂处罚对运动员存在着错误追究和不公正仲裁等程序风险,且缺乏相应的司法救济途径。为了解决这些问题,使兴奋剂处罚获得正当性:1)需要在相应的条文中增设运动员的权利,以制约反兴奋剂机构的权力; 2)需要建立反兴奋剂基金,确保运动员能获得相应的法律服务; 3)要建立运动员工会,以平衡运动员与反兴奋剂组织之间的关系; 4)将惩罚性的处罚与运动员的可责性联系在一起,使兴奋剂处罚迎合比例原则的要求。兴奋剂处罚只有获得正当性,其才能融入到当前的法律体系之中,进而才有可能充分调动社会各方面的力量,形成打击使用兴奋剂行为的合力。 The use of doping to gain competitive advantage is a category of fraud. World Anti-Doping Code( WADC) has been challenged in the law field for many years because the code’s punishment is to deprive the qualification of competition of the accused athlete,which belongs to the category of occupational prohibition in criminal punishment,but its procedure is civil arbitration. Thus,how to protect the rights of athletes in procedure has become an unavoidable problem under the current legal framework. From the standpoint of normative analysis and social relationship analysis,the current punitive doping punishment has procedural risks such as wrong investigation and unfair arbitration for athletes,and lacks corresponding judicial remedies. In order to solve these problems and make the punishment of doping legitimate,it is necessary to add the rights of athletes in the corresponding provisions to restrict the power of anti-doping agencies;to establish anti-doping funds to ensure that athletes can obtain the corresponding legal services;to establish athletes’ unions to balance the relationship between athletes and anti-doping organizations. Finally,the punitive punishment is linked with athletes’ responsibility,so that doping punishment conforms to the principle of proportionality. Doping can only be incorporated into the current legal system only if it is justified,and then it is possible to fully mobilize the strength of all sectors of society and form a joint force to combat the use of doping.
作者 杨春然 王学栋 YANG Chun-ran;WANG Xue-dong(School of Law,China University of Petroleum,Qingdao 266580,Shandong China)
出处 《北京体育大学学报》 CSSCI 北大核心 2018年第11期22-32,共11页 Journal of Beijing Sport University
基金 教育部人文社会科学基金一般项目(项目编号:17YJA820038)
关键词 反兴奋剂 法学 国际体育仲裁 诈骗行为 运动员 程序风险 程序保护 司法救济 anti-doping law international sports arbitration fraud athletes procedural risk procedural protection judicial remedy
  • 相关文献

二级参考文献88

  • 1蔡彦敏.从O.J.辛普森刑、民事案件评析美国诉讼制度[J].中外法学,1998,10(3):110-114. 被引量:25
  • 2黎宏.被害人承诺问题研究[J].法学研究,2007,29(1):84-104. 被引量:134
  • 3张明楷.《外国刑法纲要》[M].清华大学出版社,1998年版.第767-768页.
  • 4[日]堀内捷三.《刑法总论》.有斐阁,2000年版.第233页.
  • 5See Westen. P, The logic of consent: the diversity and deceptiveness of consent as a defense o criminal conduct. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. 2004, pp. 127 -128.
  • 6See Raz. J, The morality of freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988, p. 408.
  • 7See Vera Bergelson, Victims' Rights And Victims' Wrongs: Comparative Liability In Criminal Law, Stanford:Stanford Law Books, 2009, pp. 21 - 22.
  • 8See Clarence Ray Jeffery, The Development of Crime in Early English Society, 47 J. Crim. L. Criminology &Police sci. 1957, p. 662.
  • 9See Stephen Schafer, Victimology: The Victim And His Criminal, Reston, VA: Reston, 1977, p. 22.
  • 10See Matthew v. Ollerton, 1692, 90 Eng. Rep. 438 (K. B. ).

共引文献102

同被引文献39

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