奥运会兴奋剂复检及其时效的法律问题探讨——以刘春红案为起点

Legal Dimension of IOC Reanalysis Programs and the Statute of Limitation: Taking the Example of Liu Chunhong's Case

投稿时间：2018-01-27

DOI：

英文关键词:anti-doping law reanalysis limitation retroactivity

基金项目:国家社会科学基金项目（17BTY007）

作者	单位	E-mail
李睿智	苏州大学王健法学院	liruizhi_suda@126.com

摘要点击次数: 2893

全文下载次数: 3910

中文摘要:

以中国举重运动员刘春红因2016年兴奋剂复检显示阳性结果而被取消在2008年奥运会比赛成绩，随后她就该处罚决定向国际体育仲裁院提起上诉一案为起点，对奥运会复检程序进行分析，研究发现：尽管复检程序总体上对保障清白运动员的权利和维护反兴奋剂秩序具有积极作用，但在时效方面存在一定瑕疵，如时效过长，可能加大运动员的举证难度，也不利于保护第三人的信赖利益；国际奥委会对复检程序适用时效规定时未能保持前后一致；反兴奋剂组织不严格执行时效规定可能会造成时效变相延长。此外，《世界反兴奋剂条例》第17条关于时效的规定仍不够清晰，应当通过释义明确可以导致时效中止、中断或延长的情形，以确保在维护纯洁体育的同时，合理保障运动员的权利。

英文摘要:

Due to her adverse analytical finding in IOC reanalysis of the stored samples from 2008 Beijing Olympic Games in 2016, Liu Chunhong, a Chinese athlete, was disqualified of her result of the women's 69kg weightlifting at the Beijing Olympic Games. She then appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. The result of the analysis of IOC reanalysis programs shows that although the reanalysis programs play a positive role in the protection of the clean athletes as well as the progress of the anti-doping campaign, there are several defects in terms of the application of the statute of limitations: an over-length time bar may increase the difficulty for athletes to adduce evidence and be adverse to the reliance interests of unspecified third parties. IOC does not keep consistent in the application of the statute of limitations to the reanalysis programs, and the less strict enforcement of the statute of limitations by the anti-doping organizations may cause the extension of limitation in disguised form. In addition, the Article 17 of World Anti-Doping Code is not explicit enough, and the conditions, which may cause the suspension, discontinuance and extension to the period of limitation, should be added to it through a comment, so as to safeguard both the pure sport and the rights of athletes.

查看全文查看/发表评论下载PDF阅读器

关闭