|
ITTF
Handbook 2009
/ 2010 |
| Index |
Description |
| 5.03 |
PROOF OF DOPING |
| 5.03.01 |
Burdens and Standards of Proof
The ITTF and its National Associations shall have the burden of establishing that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred. The standard of proof shall be whether the ITTF or its National Association has established an anti-doping rule violation to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel 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, except as provided in Articles 5.10.4 and 5.10.6, where the Athlete must satisfy a higher burden of proof. |
| 5.03.02 |
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: |
| 5.03.02.01 |
WADA-accredited laboratories 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- 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- occurred which could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding-, then the ITTF or its National Association- shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Findin-g.
|
| 5.03.02.02 |
Departures from any other International Standard or other anti-doping rule or policy which did not cause an Adverse Analytical Finding or other anti-doping rule violation shall not invalidate such results. If the Athlete or other Person establishes that a departure from another International Standard or other anti-doping rule or policy which could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding or other anti-doping rule violation occurred, then the ITTF or its National Association shall have the burden to establish that such a departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding or the factual basis for the anti-doping rule violation. |
| 5.03.02.03 |
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 irrebuttable 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. |
| 5.03.02.04 |
The hearing panel 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 Athletefs or other Personfs 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 tribunal) and to answer questions either from the hearing panel or from the Anti-Doping Organization asserting the anti-doping rule violation. |