Introduction

Article 3.1 of the Code provides for both the burden and the standard of proof in proceedings before tribunals or CAS under the Code. As has been outlined above, the proof of the violations contained in Articles 2.2 and 2.4–2.8 of the Code, will usually cover a wider range of factual circumstances and potentially probative evidential material, than will be the case with violations under Articles 2.1–2.3. In hearings involving a broader range of factual matters, national and international tribunals and CAS, whether at first instance or on appeal, are more likely to be required to weigh a range of factual issues, as opposed to limited issues such as whether a test result has been reached after following the proper process and is valid. In such hearings, there will inevitably be a greater focus on the application of the principles concerning the burden and standard of proof to the evidence presented to establish the alleged violations.

The general burden of proof

Burden on the anti-doping organisation

Article 3.1 provides that the burden of establishing that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred lies on the anti-doping organisation bringing the allegation. The organisation will have to establish the elements of the anti-doping rule violation alleged to have been committed.