The 2012 and 2014 Olympic Doping Scandals: A Critical Analysis of the Effectiveness of Anti-Doping Mechanisms in Sports Law and the Necessity of Global Unity and Rehabilitation in Enforcing Anti-Doping Measures
- 1 Diabetes Research Laboratories, School of Clinical Medicine Prince Charles Hospital Northside Clinical Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Abstract
This paper critically assesses the effectiveness of Olympic anti-doping measures, will consider the way in which the difficulties inherent in the detection of doping may cause infringements on rule of law principles, and discusses approaches to further encourage a mutually beneficial global culture of cooperation and compliance between nations, which must serve as the fundamental basis for the modern development of anti-doping practices. This paper further highlights how the positive steps Russian bodies have taken in response to this scandal and the tangible improvements made to their regulation of doping behaviors are a positive indicator of sports law’s capacity to enact change. Moreover, this paper will argue that an approach to anti-doping that seeks to rehabilitate and encourage positive behaviors is ultimately necessary to ensure international sport’s role in peacefully facilitating international cooperation, as approaches that vilify and permanently ostracize states that have been found in violation of anti-doping laws are ultimately ineffective at facilitating compliance.
- Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority Act 2006 (Cth).
- Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority Regulations 2006 (Cth).
- Baxter v International Olympic Committee (IOC) (2002). Award of 15 October 2002.
- Bedford, N., & Weeks, G. (1999). Doping in Sport: What Role for Administrative Law? In M. Beloff, T. Kerr, & M. Demetriou (Eds.), Sports Law (pp. 147-168). Oxford: Hart Publishing Ltd.
- Blair, F. (1999). Procedural Fairness in Doping Disputes. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 22, 885-892.
- C v (FINA), CAS 95/141 215.
- Duval, A. (2017). The Russian Doping Scandal at the Court of Arbitration for Sport: Lessons for the World Anti-Doping System. International Sports Law Journal, 16, 177-197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40318-017-0107-6
- Foschi v Fina (CAS/15S6).
- Gerdo, V. (2019). Колобков: Россия выполнила все требования WADA по предоставлению доступа к лаборатории. TASS.
- Gibson, O. (2015). Russia Accused of “State-Sponsored Doping” as Wada Calls for Athletics Ban. The Guardian.
- Healey, D. (1999). The Myth of the Level Playing Field in Sport. In M. Beloff, T. Kerr, & M. Demetriou (Eds.), Sports Law (pp. 3-18). Oxford: Hart Publishing Ltd.
- Hunt, T. (2011). Drug Games—The International Olympic Committee and the Politics of Doping, 1960-2008. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
- Ingle, S. (2017). Russia Banned from Winter Olympics over State-Sponsored Doping. The Guardian.
- Ingle, S. (2019). Russia’s Paralympic Doping Ban Lifted after IPC Praises “Significant Reforms”. The Guardian.
- International Association of Athletics Federations (1999). IAAF Official Handbook: FINA Doping Control Rules (1998-1999).
- Kiril, Z. (2017). Five Russian Athletes Suspended for Doping RUSADA Says. The Moscow Times.
- Lawler, D. (2016). Russian Officials Admit Institutional Doping Conspiracy for the First Time But Claim Government Was Not Implicated. The Telegraph.
- National Wheelchair Basketball v International Paralympic Committee, CAS 95/122.
- Pound, R., & Clarke, K. (2011). Doping in Sport. In J. Nafziger, & S. Ross (Eds.), Handbook on International Sports Law (pp. 133-161). Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.