Symposium „Reform des World Anti-Doping Code“

MPI for Comparative and International Private Law, Hamburg 05.10.2007 , 17.00

The World Anti-Doping Agency is currently revising the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC) in order to strengthen the fight against doping in sport by means of private law.

This reform and its consequences for athletes, sporting associations and legal practitioners were at the center of the Hamburg symposium during which jurists and athletes participated together in a discussion on the revision of the WADC. In addition to presentation of the current regulatory scheme of the WADC and the existing jurisprudence of the Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS), the new regulations of the WADC were looked at from a legal perspective and commented upon by representatives of athletes and athletic associations as well as legal practitioners (the final draft of the WADC has subsequently been published).

Whereas cycling professional Jörg Jaksche complained that athletes had not adequately been made a part of the reform process, neither he nor his attorney, Dr. Michael Lehner, contested the fundamental role of the WADA-Code. Jaksche has, in fact, benefited from the old regulations to the extent that he is serving a suspension of one year rather than the newly-envisioned two year period.

In contrast, Ulrich Haas, Mainz legal scholar and one of the drafters of the new regulations, demanded more individualised justice. Dr. Dirk-Reinger Martens, arbitrator with the Lausanne based Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), believed the newly incorporated two year suspension was too rigid in that athletes only culpable for grossly negligent doping would be penalized as harshly as those who do so intentionally.

From the perspective of the sports organisations, Prof. Dr. Denis Oswald, also a CAS arbitrator, stressed the leading role played by the international sporting associations in the fight against doping and in the reform of the WADA-Code; a perspective shared by Marion Rodewald, Olympic Hockey champion and member of an advisory council for the German Olympic Association. Oswald demanded more flexibility and case-specific consideration.

As formulated by Jörg Jaksche in his closing comments, it became ultimately clear that the goal shared by all of the panel participants was a scheme of deterrence capable of ensuring that young athletes would not drift down a wrong and fateful path.