Www.isr.nl



NATIONAL ANTIDOPING RULES 2016These Antidoping Rules are based on the National Antidoping Rules 2016 of the Antidoping Organization (version March 2016).These Rules were adopted by the Board of the Stichting Instituut Sportrechtspraak [the Dutch Sport Tribunal Foundation, ISR] on June 11, 2016 and became effective on June 16, 2016, with due observance of the transitional provisions.Table of ContentsTransitional provisions Title I – Terms Article 1 :Defined terms Article 2 :DopingTitle II – Antidoping Rule ViolationsArticle 3:PresenceArticle 4:UseArticle 5:Insufficient cooperationArticle 6:Whereabouts-failuresArticle 7:ManipulationArticle 8:Possession Article 9:TraffickingArticle 10:AdministrationArticle 11:ComplicityArticle 12:Prohibited associationTitle III – Prohibited substances and prohibited methodsArticle 13:List of prohibited substances Article 14:Therapeutic Use Exemptions (TUEs) Article 15:EducationTitle IV – Enforcement Article 16: EnforcementArticle 17: Doping testsArticle 18: ReanalysisArticle 19: Registered testing poolArticle 20: Investigations and intelligence gatheringTitle V – Results managementArticle 21:GeneralArticle 21a:Prosecutor, duties and competencesArticle 22 :Review of (potential) doping casesArticle 23:B-sample analysisArticle 24:Communication of test resultsArticle 25:Follow-up screening Article 26:Disciplinary actionsArticle 27:Accepting doping violation and sanctionTitle VI – Disciplinary hearingArticle 28:GeneralArticle 29:Bringing doping cases before the tribunal (reporting)Article 30:Hearing doping casesArticle 31:ConclusionArticle 32:Non-appearanceTitle VII – Proof of dopingArticle 33:Burden of proofArticle 34:Methods of establishing facts and assumptionsTitle VIII – Game sanctions and match resultsArticle 35:Automatic disqualification match resultsArticle 36:Game sanctions and penaltiesTitle IX – SanctionsArticle 37:Sanction for violating Articles 3, 4 and 8Article 38:Set-up for the application of Title IX and Title XArticle 39:Sanction for violating Articles 5 and 7Article 40:Sanction for violating Article 6Article 41:Sanction for violating Articles 9 and 10Article 42:Sanction for violating Article 11Article 43:Sanction for violating Article 12Title X – Sanction and reduction of sanctionsArticle 44:No fault or negligenceArticle 45:No considerable degree of fault or negligenceArticle 46: Substantial assistanceArticle 47:Admission prior to the doping case hearingArticle 48:Admission following notificationArticle 49:Several options for the reduction of sanctionsArticle 50:Multiple violationsTitle XI – Other sanction provisionsArticle 51:Commencement of the ineligibility period Article 52:Status during ineligibilityArticle 53:Consequences for teams (if applicable)Article 54:Review Article 55:Limitation periodArticle 56:Mutual recognitionArticle 57:PublicationTitle XII – AppealsArticle 58:AppealsArticle 59:Decisions subject to appealArticle 60:Right of appealArticle 61:Appeal/intervention by WADAArticle 62:Appeal to TUEs Article 63:Appeal periodsTitle XIII – Remaining provisionsArticle 64:Roles and responsibilities of the Antidoping OrganizationArticle 65:Roles and responsibilities of athletes Article 66:Roles and responsibilities of support personnelArticle 67:Roles and responsibilities of the Dutch Sports AssociationArticle 68:PrivacyArticle 69:CostsArticle 70:Relation to other rulesArticle 71:InterpretationArticle 72:Transitional provisionsArticle 73:AppendicesArticle 74:Concluding provisionTransitional provisionsExplanationThe introduction of a sports prosecutor and investigation committee requires an amendment to the articles of incorporation of the Dutch sports organization. The articles of incorporation must be amended in accordance with the official rules of the sports organization and submitted to the General Meeting of Members or the Members’ Council. This means that the amendment to the articles of incorporation must be submitted and, following the approval of the General Meeting of Members or the Members’ Council, the person or persons authorized to do so must have the amendment to the articles of incorporation laid down by notarial deed. After the deed has been executed, the amendment to the articles of incorporation is a fact. Consequently, the amendment to the articles of incorporation takes time.Transitional provisions:Pursuant to the Board resolution dated June 11, 2016, as adopted by the Board of the Instituut Sportrechtspraak, the Antidoping Rules will – insofar as in these transitional provisions no earlier or later time has been stipulated for specific parts or in specific cases – come into effect the moment that:the sports organization has amended the articles of incorporation and has had this amendment laid down by notarial deed, in such a manner that the articles of incorporation meet the requirements set by the Board of the Instituut Sportrechtspraak and that it has been laid down, including, in accordance with the articles of incorporation, that the prosecutor is a body of the sports association, and the Board of the Instituut Sportrechtspraak has appointed one or more prosecutors.Until that moment, these Rules do not come into effect and the Antidoping Rules adopted on August 31, 2015 and effective on September 15, 2015 apply. The secretariat of the Instituut Sportrechtspraak keeps a list of sports associations that have fulfilled the above amendment to the articles of incorporation. The Board will announce the appointment of one or more prosecutors on the website of the Instituut Sportrechtspraak.Title I DefinitionsArticle 1 Defined terms 60-minute testing window: the consecutive period of sixty minutes to be provided for each day by an athlete who is included in the registered testing pool, and during which period this member must be traceable and available for testing.Adverse analytical finding: a report from a WADA-accredited or WADA-approved laboratory, that, consistent with the ISL, identifies in a sample: (i) the presence of one or more prohibited substances, its metabolites and/or markers (including elevated quantities of endogenous substances) and/or (ii) evidence of the use of one or more prohibited methods.Adverse passport finding: a report identified as such in the applicable International Standards.Antidoping Organization: Stichting Antidoping Autoriteit The Netherlands and/or the independent administrative body, the Antidoping Organization, the NADO appointed by the Dutch authorities for The Netherlands.Antidoping Rules: (i) the antidoping Rules laid down by the Dutch Sports Association including the appendices adopted by the Antidoping Organization or WADA (hereinafter: these Rules), and (ii) antidoping Rules adopted by an ADO or another body or organization, even if this antidoping Code bears a different title at the relevant ADO or another body or organization. Any rules laid down by an authority or legislator in respect of antidoping will also be considered an antidoping Code for the application of these Rules.Antidoping Organization (ADO): a National Antidoping Organization (NADO), an international federation, the World Antidoping Agency (WADA), the International Olympic Committee (IOC), the International Paralympic Committee (IPC), an organizer of an event, or another body or organization authorized to carry out or commission a doping test.Antidoping violation: any violation of an antidoping ruleAssistant doping test official: a person designated by the organization implementing the doping test to assist the doping test official. The title of this official may vary for each implementing organization (for example: chaperone, steward).Athlete support staff: (i) any coach, trainer, manager, agent, team staff member, official, medical or paramedical staff member, parent, legal representative, as well as (ii) any other person who is bound by the s of incorporation, regulations and resolutions of the Dutch Sports Association, of a legal person or of an organization affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association, who works with one or more members participating in or preparing for a sports competition, who assists, supports or accompanies these members, or has these members under medical treatment.Attempt: purposely engaging in conduct that constitutes a substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in the commission of an antidoping rule violation. Provided, however, there will beno antidoping rule violation based solely on an attempt to commit a violation if the person renounces the attempt prior to it being discovered by a third party not involved in the attempt.Atypical finding: a result of a WADA-accredited or WADA-approved laboratory, evidencing that further investigation as referred to in the prohibited list, the International Standard for Laboratories (ISL) or another International Standard is required to determine whether there is an adverse analytical finding.Atypical passport finding: a report listed as such in the applicable International Standard(s).Board: the Board of the Dutch Sports Association, even if this Board bears different names in the relevant Dutch Sports Association.Biological passport: the program and methods of gathering and processing data as referred to in the ISTI and the ISL.CAS: the Court of Arbitration for Sport.Chaperone: the person asked by the person involved to accompany him/her during those stages of the doping test procedure where this is allowed according to the International Standard for Testing and Investigations (ISTI).Confirmed: in the sense of the analysis of the B-sample, ‘confirmed’ means that the same prohibited substance and/or prohibited method is found in the B-sample as in the A-sample. If a substance is only prohibited when a particular quantity is exceeded, it is necessary to confirm that the quantity of that particular substance found in the A and the B-sample also exceeds the limit in the B-sample, unless there is an exogenous prohibited substance to which a specific threshold applies based on the prohibited list and/or the ISL, in which case a confirmation only requires any quantity of the same prohibited substance to be present in the B-petition: a single race, match, game or singular sport contest organized by or under the auspices of the Dutch Sports Association or an international federation. Control findings: any data resulting from an (attempted) doping test, including, but not limited to,the data resulting from the analysis/analyses carried out. In any case test results include: adverse analytical findings, atypical findings, further analysis, adverse passport findings, and atypical passport findings.Contaminated product: a product that contains a prohibited substance (i) that is not disclosed on the label and (ii) not referred to in information available in a reasonable Internet search.Designate: orally informing the person involved that he/she has been selected for a doping test.Disqualification of event match results: declaring an athlete’s individual results with regard to a particular match, competition or event invalid, including all ensuing consequences such as forfeiting medals, prizes, prize money and the forfeiture of points.Doping case: a possible antidoping violation.Doping control: all steps and processes from the moment a person involved reports at the doping test station up to and including the signing of the relevant (doping test) form.Doping Control Officer (DCO): a person appointed and trained by the organization that implements the doping tests, who has been charged with the delegated authority to carry out the doping tests.Doping control process: the process that includes (i) applying for, assessing and granting (a request for) a TUE, (ii) gathering and processing whereabouts information, (iii) test distribution planning, selecting and identifying an athlete, sample collection, sample transport to the laboratory, (iv) the analysis of a sample (including reanalysis and further analysis, as well as a further investigation), and (v) test result management, including disciplinary proceedings.Doping organization: the body or organization responsible for the doping tests.Doping test process: those parts of the doping test process involving (i) test planning, (ii) distribution planning, (iii) sample collection, (iv) sample processing, and (v) sample transport to the laboratory.Event: a series of individual competitions conducted together under the responsibility of one authorized international federation, national sports association or organization (e.g. the Olympic Games, World Championships or European Championships).Exemption: a decision taken by the Antidoping Organization or another authorized ADO in accordance with the TUE-annex and/or the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions (ISTUE), containing the granting of a TUE.Fault: any breach of duty and/or any lack of care appropriate to a particular situation. Hearing panel: the body or tribunal, including the CAS, authorized to administer law under these Rules, the articles of incorporation and/or a/another Code of the Dutch Sports Association or an ADO.In-competition: (for the application of these Rules) the period starting twelve hours before a competition, and continuing through to (i) the conclusion of the relevant competition, or (ii) the completion of the planned doping test, if any, following the conclusion of the competition. International federations and other ADOs may use a period that differs from the period used in these Rules.Ineligibility: sanction whereby the athlete is not permitted to participate in any match, competition, event or other activity during a specified period, nor act or participate in any capacity within the Dutch Sports Association (nor any association, club, team or other legal person affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association).International event: an event or competition organized by or under the auspices of the IOC, the IPC, an international federation or another international sports organization (such as the continental bodies affiliated with international federations or with the IOC, and other international organizations for several sports acting as the administrative body of a continental or regional event).International federation: international non-governmental organization that manages one or more types of sport on an international level and of which the Dutch Sports Association is a member, or with which the Dutch Sports Association is affiliated.International Standard: an international standard adopted by WADA in support of the World Antidoping Code, in any case including: the Prohibited List International Standard (the prohibited list), the ISTI, the ISL, the ISTUE and the International Standard for the Protection of Privacy and Personal Information (ISPPPI). The International Standards apply to these Rules and are deemed to be a part thereof. The Technical Documents belonging to an International Standard are deemed to be part of the relevant International Standard.Marker: a compound or group of compounds or biological variables that indicates the use of a prohibited substance and/or the application of a prohibited method.Member: the natural person who, through membership, license, contract, participation in a competition (of the Dutch Sports Association or an international federation) or in another way, is bound by the Articles of incorporation, regulations and decisions of the Dutch Sports Association, or of a legal person affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association. Persons who are active or employed, (e.g. persons who are active for or employed by an active association within the Dutch Sports Association or for a team that takes part in a sport), but who are not affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association through membership, license or any contract, are also deemed members.Metabolite: any substance produced by a biotransformation process.Minor: a natural person who has not reached the age of eighteen years.National event: an event that is not an international event.Negative finding: if the doping test shows that:no (prohibited quantities) (or metabolites of) prohibited substances and/or prohibited methods were found in an athlete’s sample; andno markers were found in an athlete’s sample; andno use was made of (the application of) a prohibited method; orwith regard to the prohibited substances and/or prohibited methods found and/or used the athlete has/had a valid athlete TUE as defined in these Rules and/or the ISTUE, and has acted in accordance with the conditions attached to this TUE.Out-of-competition: any period that is not in-competition.Person involved: the athlete (i) who has been selected for a doping test, (ii) who has been or is to be subjected to a doping test, (iii) who is the subject of an investigation into a possible doping violation, (iv) who grants or is willing to grant substantial assistance, (v) who must demonstrate something under these Rules, (vi) on whom a disciplinary measure has been imposed, (vii) against whom charges have been filed, (viii) who admitted to having committed an antidoping rule violation and/or has been found guilty of committing an antidoping rule violation, (ix) who has appealed against a decision or judgement related to him/her, (x) who is the subject of a decision or judgment under appeal, or (xi) on whom an ineligibility period has been imposed.Positive finding: if the doping test shows that:- (prohibited quantities) (or metabolites of) one or more prohibited substances and/or prohibited methods were found in the athlete’s sample; and/or- markers were found/a marker was found to be present in an athlete’s sample; and/or- (the application of) a prohibited method was used; and- with regard to the prohibited substance(s) and/or prohibited method(s) found and/or used the athlete does/did not have a valid TUE as defined in these Rules and/or the ISTUE, and/or has not acted in accordance with the conditions attached to this TUE.Prohibited List: the list of prohibited substances and prohibited methods that is part of these Rules and was adopted by WADA as the Prohibited List International Standard.Prosecutor: the prosecutor of the Instituut Sportrechtspraak.Prohibited method: any method so described on the prohibited list.Prohibited substance: any substance, or class of substances, so described on the prohibited list.Provisional hearing: an oral hearing occurring as part of a disciplinary measure to be taken by the Board, and which is intended to inform the athlete and to give him the opportunity to be heard in either written or oral form. The provisional hearing does not involve a full review of the facts of the case.Registered testing pool: a pool of highest-priority athletes established by the Antidoping Organization, another NADO or international federation.Sample: any biological material, including DNA-carrying material, e.g. urine, blood, sweat or saliva.Specific substance: the (classes of) substances identified on the prohibited list. In principle all substances identified on the prohibited list are specific substances, except substances in the following classes: (a) anabolic agents, (b) hormones and related substances, (c) hormone antagonists and modulators so identified on the prohibited list as non-specific substances, and (d) stimulants so identified on the prohibited list as non-specific substances. Specific substances never include prohibited methods.Sports Association: the Dutch sports association that has laid down these Rules.Target testing: selection of specific athletes for testing. Athletes may be selected on the basis of drawing lots, match results, or any other method to be determined by an ADO. Team sport: a sport in which the substitution of players is permitted during a competition.Testing: that part of the doping test process that comprises the test distribution plan as well as the sample collection.Whereabouts failure: any combination of three missed tests and/or filing failures as defined in the ISTI or the Whereabouts Annex. The term used in the ISTI for whereabouts failure is ‘filing failure’. Whereabouts information: the information as defined in the ISTI and the Whereabouts-Annex, which athletes who have been included in the registered testing pool must provide to the Antidoping Organization or another ADO. World Antidoping Code: the current World Antidoping Code adopted by WADA, on which these Rules are based.Where these Rules contain terms in the singular form, the plural form of that term also applies and vice versa, unless expressly stipulated otherwise.Where these Rules set out provisions in the present tense, the provisions also apply to events in the past, unless expressly stipulated otherwise.The documents adopted by WADA can be found on: wada-.Article 2 Doping2.1.In these Rules, doping means the antidoping rule violations as set out in Articles 3 through 12.2.2.Any athlete and athlete support person are deemed to know the contents of and the appendices pertaining to these Rules, to know when there is an antidoping rule violation, and to be aware of the (classes of) prohibited substances and prohibited methods specified in the prohibited list. Any athlete is obliged to keep informed of the current prohibited list, as published on the website of WADA and the Antidoping Organization.2.3.Any athlete and athlete support person must acquaint him or herself with the contents of these Rules and its appendices. When participating in a competition or event abroad, the athlete must also acquaint him or herself with the antidoping rules and (test) procedures applicable to the relevant competition or event prior to this participation.2.4.Strict liability applies to Articles 3 and 4. This means that it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence, or knowing use on the athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an antidoping rule violation.Title II Antidoping Rule ViolationsArticle 3 Presence3.1.The presence of a prohibited substance and/or a prohibited method, its metabolites and/or markers in aathlete’s sample constitutes an antidoping rule violation.3.2.Except for those substances to which a specific threshold applies according to the prohibited list and/orthe ISL, any presence of a prohibited substance, a prohibited method, its metabolites and/or markersin an athlete’s sample constitutes an antidoping rule violation.3.3.The prohibited list or another International Standard may contain special criteria for assessing (the presence of and/or the quantity found in) prohibited substances that may also be produced endogenously.3.4.Presence is established by any of the following:there is an adverse analytical finding after analysis of the A-sample where the athlete waives analysis of the B-sample;there is an adverse analytical finding after the analysis of the B-sample confirms the result of the analysis of the A-sample; and/orthe B-sample is split into two bottles, and the analysis of the second bottle confirms the presence of the prohibited substance and/or prohibited method, its metabolites and/or markers found in the first bottle.3.5.There is no antidoping rule violation if the athlete has/had a relevant and valid athlete TUE with regard to the prohibited substance(s) and/or prohibited method(s) found within the meaning of these Rules and/or the ISTUE, or such a TUE is granted with retroactive effect, and the athlete has acted in accordance with the conditions attached to this TUE.3.6.The Antidoping Organization has the right to analyze the B-sample, even if the athlete waives the analysis of the B-sample.3.7.It is the athlete’s personal duty to ensure that no prohibited substances, prohibited methods, its metabolites and/or markers enters his or her body. Athletes are responsible for any prohibited substance, prohibited method, its metabolites and/or markers found in their samples. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence or knowing use on the athlete’s part be demonstrated to establish an antidoping rule violation under Article 3.3.8.Any presence of a prohibited substance, a prohibited method, its metabolites and/or markers in an athlete’s sample will constitute an antidoping rule violation under Article 3, irrespective of when the relevant prohibited substances and/or prohibited methods were taken, administered or used.Article 4 Use4.1.Use or attempted use of a prohibited substance or a prohibited method constitutes an antidoping rule violation. The success or failure of the (attempted) use of a prohibited substance or prohibited method is not material for the assessment of whether there is an antidoping rule violation.4.2.Use means: the utilization, application, ingestion, injection or consumption by any means whatsoever of any prohibited substance and/or prohibited method.4.3.If in the event of an adverse analytical finding, the analysis of the B-sample does not confirm the analysis of the A-sample, use may nevertheless be established, and therefore constitute an antidoping rule violation, if:it is based on reliable analytical data from the analysis of the A-sample; anda satisfactory explanation can be given for the lack of confirmation of the adverse analytical finding of the analysis of the A-sample. Whether there is a satisfactory explanation is initially determined by the Antidoping Organization under the application of Title V. Whether there is a satisfactory explanation is ultimately determined by the competent disciplinary tribunal.4.4.There is no antidoping role violation if the athlete has/had a relevant and valid athlete TUE with regard to the prohibited substance(s) and/or prohibited method(s) found within the meaning of these Rules and/or the ISTUE, or such a TUE is granted with retroactive effect, and the athlete has acted in accordance with the conditions attached to this TUE.4.5.It is the athlete’s personal duty to ensure that no prohibited substances, prohibited methods, its metabolites and/or markers enters his or her body. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence or knowing use on the athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an antidoping rule violation. In order to be able to establish attempted use of a prohibited substance or a prohibited method intent on the athlete’s part must be demonstrated.4.6.Use or attempted use of a prohibited substance or a prohibited method may also be established by other reliable means, such as admissions, witness statements, documentary evidence, conclusions drawn from longitudinal profiling, including data collected as part of the athlete’s biological passport, or other analytical information, even if this analytical information as such does not satisfy all the requirements to establish a violation of Article 3.Article 5 Insufficient cooperation5.1.Evading sample collection constitutes an antidoping rule violation.5.2.Refusing to assist in, or failing to subject to testing without compelling reasons after having beenselected for testing, whether orally or in writing, constitutes an antidoping rule violation.Article 6 Whereabouts failures6.1.Any combination of three officially missed tests and/or filing failures within a twelve-month period by an athlete included in a registered testing pool constitutes an antidoping rule violation.6.2.The obligations as set forth in the ISTI and the Whereabouts appendix apply to athletes included in a registered testing pool.Article 7 Tampering 7.1.Tampering or attempted tampering constitutes an antidoping rule violation.7.2.Tampering includes:behavior that subverts the doping test process;intentionally or dishonestly interfering with any part of the doping test process;bringing improper influence to bear on any part of the doping test process;improperly interfering in the doping test process to alter results or prevent the course of normal procedures;falsifying in any way a TUE (application) and/or improperly influencing and/or withholding information that is or may be relevant for a TUE (application);obstructing and/or misleading a doping test official;committing fraudulent acts with regard to the doping test process;providing false information and/or data to an ADO;intentionally interfering or attempting to interfere with a doping test official;intimidating or attempting to intimidate a potential witness; and/orsimilar acts.7.3.Tampering or attempted tampering constitutes an antidoping rule violation, irrespective of the circumstance that the doping test involved in the attempt was performed correctly.Article 8 Possession 8.1.Out-of-competition possession, at any time or location, of a prohibited substance or any prohibited method constitutes an antidoping rule violation.8.2.In-competition possession of any prohibited substance or any prohibited method constitutes an antidoping rule violation.8.3.There is possession if:an athlete (i) actually, physically possesses a prohibited substance and/or method, (ii) has the intention to obtain the actual, physical prohibited substance and/or method and/or (iii) the athlete has the intention to obtain control over the prohibited substance and/or method;only an athlete has control over the prohibited substance and/or method or the premises in which the prohibited substance and/or method exists, but there is no actual, physical possession as referred to in Article 8.3. sub a;not only an athlete has control over the prohibited substance and/or method or the premises in which the prohibited substance and/or method is present, but the athlete was aware of the presence of the prohibited substance and/or method and intended to exercise control over it; and/oran athlete has purchased, obtained or bought one or more prohibited substances and/or methods via the Internet and/or in any other way.8.4.For the application of these Rules, the purchase of a prohibited substance is considered equivalent to possession, even where the prohibited substance does not reach or has not reached the buyer, e.g. because the product does not arrive, is received by someone else, or is sent to the address of a third party.8.5.Mere possession does not constitute an antidoping rule violation if, prior to receiving notification of a doping case in respect of possession, the athlete has taken concrete action to demonstrate that (i) he/she never intended to have the prohibited substance and/or prohibited method; and (ii) has renounced possession by explicitly declaring it to the Antidoping Organization or another ADO.8.6.There is no antidoping rule violation if:in respect of the relevant prohibited substance and/or method, the athlete can demonstrate that the possession or attempted possession results from and is consistent with a relevant and valid TUE as defined in these Rules and/or the ISTUE, and the conditions associated to this TUE were acted upon; orthe athlete can demonstrate another acceptable justification.8.7.Possession of an out-of-competition prohibited substance and/or method used by an athlete support person constitutes an antidoping rule violation, unless:the athlete support person can demonstrate that in respect of the relevant prohibited substance and/or method, the possession is consistent with a relevant and valid TUE as defined in these Rules and/or the ISTUE, and the conditions associated to this TUE were acted upon; orthe athlete support person can demonstrate another acceptable justification.Article 9 Trafficking9.1.Trafficking or attempted trafficking in any prohibited substance and/or prohibited method constitutes an antidoping rule violation.9.2.Trafficking means selling, giving, providing, transporting, sending, delivering or distributing or possessing for any such purpose, one or more prohibited substances or prohibited methods either physically or by electronic or other means, to a third party.9.3.There is no antidoping rule violation on account of trafficking if it includes the actions of bona fide medical staff involving a prohibited substance or method used for (i) genuine and legal therapeutic purposes or (ii) another acceptable justification.9.4.There is no antidoping rule violation on account of trafficking if it includes the actions involving prohibited substances which are not prohibited out-of-competition, unless the circumstances as a whole demonstrate that such prohibited substances are not intended for genuine and legal therapeutic purposes, or are intended to enhance sport performance.Article 10 Administration 10.1. Administration or attempted administration to any athlete, at any time or place, of any out-of-competition prohibited substance and/or method constitutes an antidoping rule violation. 10.2. Administration or attempted administration to any athlete in-competition, of an in-competition prohibited substance and/or method, constitutes an antidoping rule violation. 10.3. For the application of these Rules, administration means:providing, delivering, or supplying a prohibited substance or method;supervising the use or attempted use by another person of a prohibited substance or method;facilitating the use or attempted use by another person of a prohibited substance of method; andotherwise participating in the use or attempted use by another person of a prohibited substance or method.10.4. There is no antidoping rule violation on account of administration, if the actions include bona fide medical staff involving a prohibited substance or method used for (i) genuine and legal therapeutic purposes or (ii) another acceptable justification.10.5. There is no antidoping rule violation on account of administration, if the actions are related to prohibited substances which are not prohibited out-of-competition, unless the circumstances as a whole demonstrate that such prohibited substances are not intended for genuine and legal therapeutic purposes, or are intended to enhance sport performance.Article 11 ComplicityHelping, supporting, assisting, and cooperating in, aiding, abetting, stimulating, promoting and encouraging, inciting, instigating, conspiring, and collaborating to, covering up, concealing and/or any (other) form of intentional complicity in:committing an antidoping rule violation;an attempted (commission of) an antidoping rule violation; and/oran athlete not complying with the provisions in Article 52.1,constitutes an antidoping rule violation.Article 12 Prohibited association12.1. Association of an athlete, whether in a professional or sport-related capacity, with any athlete support person who has been served a period of ineligibility for having committed an antidoping rule violation, which period of ineligibility has not yet expired, constitutes an antidoping rule violation.12.2. Association of an athlete, whether in a professional or sport-related capacity, with any athlete support person that (i) is not subject to the authority of an ADO, and (ii) has been convicted for or found guilty in a criminal or disciplinary proceeding of actions that would have constituted a violation of antidoping rules if the relevant athlete support person had been subject to the authority of an ADO, constitutes an antidoping rule violation.12.3. For the application of Article 12.2, the conviction or guilt referred to in that provision results in the exclusion of the relevant support person, which exclusion means that the athletes referred to in the previous paragraph are not permitted to work with this athlete support person.This exclusion, during which the antidoping rule violation referred to in the previous paragraph can take place, would be in force for the longer of the following periods:six years from the criminal, professional or disciplinary decision; orthe duration of the sanction imposed in the criminal, professional or disciplinary proceedings.12.4. Association by an athlete, whether in a professional or sport-related capacity, with any athlete support person acting as a front, intermediary or middleman for athlete support personnel as referred to in Article 12.1 or Article 12.2, constitutes an antidoping rule violation.12.5. The application of Article 12.1 through Article 12.3 requires that:the athlete has previously been advised in writing by an ADO with jurisdiction over the athlete, or by WADA, before reporting this athlete: (i) the relevant athlete support person’s disqualifying status, and (ii) the potential disciplinary consequence of prohibited association with such support person;the athlete can reasonably avoid the (prohibited) association; andan ADO has used reasonable efforts to advise the athlete support person who is the subject of said written notice to the Athlete, that the athlete support person may, within fifteen days, come forward to this ADO to explain that the criteria described in Articles 12.1 and 12.2 do not apply to him or her.12.6. The burden will be on the athlete to demonstrate that any association with athlete support personnel described in Article 12.1 and/or Article 12.2 is not in a professional or sport-related capacity. If the athlete is able to demonstrate this, there is no an antidoping rule violation.12.7. If the Dutch Sports Association has information on athlete support personnel that meets one of the criteria in Article 12.1 through Article 12.3, the Dutch Sports Association will immediately submit this information to the Antidoping Organization.12.8. If the Antidoping Organization has information on athlete support personnel that meets one of the criteria in Article 12.1 through Article 12.3, the Antidoping Organization will submit this information to WADA.12.9. Examples of the types of association which are prohibited under this Article include:obtaining training, strategic, technical, nutritional or medical advice;obtaining (i) therapy, (ii) treatment or (iii) prescriptions;providing any bodily products for analysis; and/orallowing the athlete support person to serve as an agent or representative. 12.10. Prohibited association need not involve any form of compensation.Title III Prohibited substances and prohibited methodsArticle 13 Prohibited List13.1. The current prohibited list that has come into effect is always the most recent prohibited list as adopted by WADA. Neither the prohibited list nor any class, category, classification, substance or method featuring on this list will be called into question within the context of a doping case.13.2. A new prohibited list will take effect on the date set for this purpose by WADA. 13.3. If the prohibited list makes reference to ADOs, it only refers to the Antidoping Organization for the application of these Rules, unless other ADOs are (also) competent.13.4. If in (the application of) these Rules reference is made to a prohibited substance, this also includes, if applicable, the precursors, metabolites and markers related to this prohibited substance.Article 14 Therapeutic Use Exemptions (‘TUEs’) 14.1. There is no an antidoping rule violation of Article 3, 4, 8 and/or 10 if (i) a valid TUE is or has been present, and (ii) the TUE has been granted in accordance with the attached provisions.14.2. The TUE-appendix contains further rules, conditions and restrictions in respect of obtaining a TUE and its validity.14.3. Athletes are bound by decisions of the Geneesmiddelen Dispensatie Sporter (GDS)-committee as described in the TUE-appendix.14.4. The GDS-committee performs its duties on the basis of the TUE-appendix. The Antidoping Organization establishes this committee. The composition, procedure, decision-making and other necessary aspects regarding the GDS-committee are determined by the Antidoping Organization, insofar as these aspects have not been determined in the TUE-appendix.Article 15 Education 15.1. The Dutch Sports Association is obliged to publish the current Antidoping Code on its website. The Dutch Sports Association’s failure to comply with this obligation does not have any consequences for the application of the provisions in Article 2.15.2. The Dutch Sports Association is obliged to inform athletes about the following subjects:the substances and methods on the prohibited list;antidoping rule violations;the doping test process;athletes’ rights and obligations;TUEs;the risks of the use of nutritional supplements;the health consequences of the use of prohibited substances and/or prohibited methods; andwhereabouts requirements (if applicable).15.3. Athletes who have been included in the registered testing pool are obliged to attend information activities organized by the Antidoping Organization.Title IV EnforcementArticle 16 Enforcement16.1. The prohibitions drawn up in these Rules are enforced by means of testing, investigations and research.16.2. Testing is aimed at obtaining analytical evidence and information under (in particular, but not limited to) the antidoping rule violations set forth in Articles 3 and 4.16.3. Research is related to:atypical findings, atypical passport findings and adverse passport findings, whereby information or evidence is collected to determine if an antidoping rule violation of (in particular, but not limited to) Article 3 or 4 has been committed; andother indications of antidoping rule violations whereby information or evidence is collected to determine if an antidoping rule violation of Article 4 - 12 has been committed.16.4. ADOs are authorized to investigate antidoping rule violations. They can use analytical and non-analytical information and data.Article 17 Doping control17.1. Any athlete is obliged to assist in a doping test by an authorized ADO at any moment and in any location in The Netherlands and beyond. This obligation also applies when an ineligibility period has been imposed on an athlete for an antidoping rule violation. Doping tests can be carried out within the context of any competition and any event, and out-of-competition.17.2.Doping controls do not take place during the period between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., unless:the execution of the doping test has started before 11:00 p.m.;the athlete has identified the timeframe between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. as the 60-minute testing window;the athlete has otherwise given permission for the execution of a doping test between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.; oran ADO has a serious and specific suspicion that the athlete may be engaged in doping. A challenge as to whether an ADO had sufficiently serious and specific suspicion, and/or the establishment that that there was indeed no sufficiently serious or specific suspicion, will have no consequences for the establishment of an antidoping rule violation on the basis of the test results of a doping test carried out between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.17.3. The following organizations have the right to carry out doping controls of athletes in-competition:the Dutch Sports Association;the Antidoping Organization;the international federation (at events organized under the auspices of this federation);WADA;the Antidoping Organization at competitions and/or events organized in The Netherlands under the auspices of the international federation, if (i) the relevant international federation does not perform tests at those events, or (ii) the Antidoping Organization is requested on behalf of the international federation to perform tests; andany other body or organization with the statutory or prescribed authority to conduct doping tests within the context of a competition or event in which an athlete takes part (e.g. the organization that organizes a particular event).17.4.Besides the Dutch Sports Association, the following organizations have the right to perform tests on athletes out-of-competition:the international federation;WADA;the Antidoping Organization; andany other body or organization with the statutory or regulatory authority to conduct testing out-of-competition.17.5.During national events, doping controls are initiated, organized and coordinated by the Antidoping Organization.17.6.Testing is conducted strictly according to the provisions in the ISTI in force at the time of the testing.17.7. The doping control appendix prescribes the further rules on doping controls.17.8.Laboratories must analyze the samples and report the findings strictly according to the ISL.Article 18Reanalysis18.1.If the Antidoping Organization is the ruling body for the doping test, the Antidoping Organization can direct a reanalysis or further analysis of any sample at any time, that is to say, before and after the notification to the athlete that there is an atypical finding or adverse analytical finding.18.2.If the Antidoping Organization is the ruling body for testing, after the notification of an atypical or adverse analytical finding has been sent to the athlete, besides the Antidoping Organization, WADA may also have any sample reanalyzed or analyzed further at any time. If WADA decides to reanalyze or further analyze a sample, WADA will bear the costs for this analysis, including the costs for storing the relevant sample.18.3.Samples are reanalyzed and analyzed further strictly according to the provisions in the ISL and, if applicable, the ISTI.18.4.A refusal of the Antidoping Organization to reanalyze or analyze a sample further and/or make it available for reanalysis does not affect (i) the adverse analytical finding, (ii) the establishment of an antidoping rule violation, nor (iii) any other aspect regarding the (disciplinary) hearing of a doping case.Article 19Registered testing pool19.1. The Antidoping Organization compiles and manages a registered testing pool. 19.2. The Antidoping Organization decides:which athletes are included in this registered testing pool;at what moment athletes are added to or removed from this registered testing pool.The Antidoping Organization communicates on this subject in writing with the athletes involved.19.3. The obligations that apply to athletes included in the registered testing pool are described in these Rules, the appendices pertaining to these Rules and/or the International Standards.19.4. An athlete who retires from active participation in sport while included in the registered testing pool, and then wishes to return to the active in-competition sport participation, will not compete ininternational events or national events until he has made himself or herself available for testing by givingsix months’ prior written notice to his or her international federation and national Antidoping Organization before commencement of the relevant national or international event. The six-monthterm commences from the date on which both the international federation and the Antidoping Organization have received the said written notification.If an athlete included in the registered testing pool retires from sport, he must report this in writing to the Antidoping Organization and the international federation (if the athlete is included in the registered testing pool of the international federation).19.5. WADA, in consultation with the relevant international federation and Antidoping Organization, may grant an exemption to the six-month written notice rule described in the previous paragraph, if the strictapplication of that rule would be manifestly unfair to the athlete. This decision by WADA may be appealed under the provisions in Title XII.19.6. An athlete who (i) retires from active participation in sport and/or (ii) no longer falls under the definition of the term ‘athlete’ as defined in Article 1 while subject to a period of ineligibility on account of an antidoping rule violation, and subsequently wishes to return to active in-competition sport participation, cannot compete in international events or national events until he has made himself available for testing by giving six months’ prior written notice before commencement of the relevant national events or international events to his or her international federation and national Antidoping Organization. If the period of ineligibility remaining as of the date the athlete (i) retired from active participation in sport and/or (ii) no longer falls under the definition of the term ‘athlete’ as defined in Article 1, is longer than six months, instead of the said six-month period, a period equaling the remaining period of ineligibility applies.19.7. The Dutch Sports Association will assist the Antidoping Organization in obtaining names, addresses and contact details of athletes to be able to manage the registered testing pool upon the request of the Antidoping Organization.Article 20 Investigations and Intelligence Gathering20.1. The Antidoping Organization obtains, assesses and processes antidoping intelligence from all available sources to perform tests and/or to investigate possible antidoping rule violations. The ISTI prescribes further rules regarding investigations.20.2. The Antidoping Organization investigates atypical findings and adverse or atypical passport findings. An adverse analytical finding may also be a reason to investigate other antidoping rule violations committed by the athlete or other persons.20.3. The Antidoping Organization investigates all other analytical or non-analytical information or intelligence that indicates a possible antidoping rule violation or possible rule violations.20.4. Investigation may lead to evidence of an antidoping rule violation, or to evidence that no antidoping rule was violated.20.5. As part of the investigations of one or more antidoping rule violations, the Antidoping Organization may exchange information with national or international sports organizations, overseas ADOs, WADA and with national or international investigative bodies and judicial bodies.20.6. Every athlete is obliged to cooperate in an investigation of the Antidoping Organization into rumors and allegations regarding antidoping rule violations.20.7. Athletes can report antidoping rule violations and any information or intelligence in respect of a possible antidoping rule violation to the Antidoping Organization or the Board. The Board is obliged to notify the Antidoping Organization and the prosecutor of such reports within fourteen days from the day that the report was received by the Dutch Sports Association.20.8. Other persons can report violations and any information or intelligence in respect of a possible violations of the antidoping rules to the Antidoping Organization.20.9. If an investigation by the Dutch Sports Association and/or an official of the Dutch Sports Association shows that an antidoping rule may have been violated, the Dutch Sports Association or its official must report this as soon as possible to the Antidoping Organization.20.10. The Antidoping Organization is entitled at any moment:to direct a reanalysis and/or an additional analysis of the athlete’s sample;to analyze or have analyzed and/or to examine or have examined urine produced or blood provided by the athlete, irrespective of the quantity of urine produced or blood provided;to direct any (other) further investigation and/or any other analysis or (subsequent) step permitted under the Code and the International Standards, or not expressly prohibited;to direct any investigation into any behavior of the athlete as part of the test performed on him/her that is relevant with regard to his/her doping test; andto examine all potentially relevant information, documentation, materials, and body samples (other than the urine produced or blood provided by the athlete) to assess whether an applicable antidoping rule has been violated by the athlete and/or other persons.20.11. All acts and/or investigations referred to in this Article are performed as part of the enforcement of the applicable antidoping rules. This enforcement is explicitly not limited to assessing a single violation, but also includes the assessment of whether the athlete and/or other persons has/have committed another antidoping rule violation.Title V Results managementArticle 21General 21.1.Results management includes:the review of (i) control findings, (ii) reports of possible antidoping rule violations, (iii) information and intelligence from investigation and research into possible antidoping rule violations, (iv) information from further investigation and re-analyses, and (v) information and intelligence from investigating bodies, public-law organizations and ADOs; andthe disciplinary action in antidoping rule violations.Anti-doping rule violations explicitly permit various aspects of results management being carried out by different ADOs.21.2. Results management may be conducted by any ADO with jurisdiction over an athlete. If the results management is conducted by the Antidoping Organization, insofar as these Rules assign roles in this regard to the Dutch Sports Association, from the moment that the Antidoping Organization reports an antidoping rule violation to the Dutch Sports Association, reference is also made to the Dutch Sports Association. The prosecutor is responsible for the disciplinary action on behalf of the Dutch Sports Association, unless (i) these Rules provide otherwise or (ii) this aspect of the results management is (partly) conducted by another ADO.21.3. In principle, results management takes place under the responsibility of the ADO that initiated the sample collection, or (if no sample collection is involved) the ADO that first provides notice to an athlete of an antidoping rule issue. Results management in connection with a possible violation of Article 6 is conducted by the International Federation or the NADO to which the athlete provides his or her whereabouts information.21.4. ADOs with jurisdiction may decide in consultation which ADO assumes which aspects of the results management. In case of antidoping rule violations an ADO is explicitly permitted to transfer results management to another ADO.21.5. If the ADOs cannot agree on which ADO is responsible for the results management, WADA will decide the matter. Any of the involved ADOs may appeal the WADA’s decision with CAS within seven days of its notification thereof. CAS will deal with the appeal in an expedited procedure by a single arbitrator.21.6. This Code also applies to antidoping rule violations resulting from a sample collection by a non-signatory body. If such collection leads to an atypical finding, an adverse analytical finding, or any other antidoping rule violation, the results management will be conducted by the Antidoping Organization.21.7. If neither the Antidoping Organization, nor any other NADO is authorized to hear an antidoping rule violation, the results management will be conducted by the relevant International Federation, or by the organization that is authorized according to the rules of the International Federation.21.8. This Code is applicable to antidoping rule violations resulting from sample collections initiated by WADA or from investigations conducted by WADA. If any athlete may have violated an antidoping rule, the results management will be conducted by the Antidoping Organization, unless WADA transfers the results management to another authorized ADO.21.9. In conformity with the provisions of this Article and the provisions of the World Antidoping Code, authorized ADOs can transfer the results management and disciplinary actions among themselves. The rules of the ADO apply to the whole or the part of the results management conducted by the ADO itself.21.10. In case of international events, the Antidoping Organization may agree to assume responsibility for the results management, if an International Federation (whether via the Dutch Sports Association or not) makes a request to that effect.21.11.The World Antidoping Code contains rules on informing relevant ADOs on:withdrawing an accusation that an antidoping rule violation was committed on the part of an athlete;imposing a disciplinary measure; andimposing a sanction without disciplinary proceedings.Article 21aProsecutor, roles and powers1.The prosecutor has the rights and powers exclusively laid down in these Rules, and supervises the compliance with these Rules.2.Pending further analysis, the prosecutor can submit a request to the Board to impose a disciplinary measure.3.The prosecutor is authorized to indict an athlete on behalf of the Dutch Sports Association.4.During a written and/or oral hearing of a case, the prosecutor acts on behalf of the Dutch Sports Association.Article 22Assessing (potential) antidoping rule violations 22.1. The Antidoping Organization is charged with the results management, unless these Rules provide otherwise and/or the results management under the previous Article is (partly) conducted by another ADO.22.2. As part the results management the Antidoping Organization assesses all adverse analytical findings, atypical findings, other test results and other (investigations of and into) possible antidoping rule violations. For the purposes of this assessment the Antidoping Organization may consult the athlete, the Dutch Sports Association, other NADOs, the International Federation and WADA.22.3. The Antidoping Organization determines if an antidoping rule violation has been committed, unless the results management under these Rules is conducted by another ADO.22.4. If after the assessment referred to in this Article, the Antidoping Organization finds that an antidoping rule violation has been committed, an adverse analytical finding will, if found, initially be deemed an adverse analytical finding.22.5. Atypical and adverse passport findings will be assessed in accordance with the relevant provisions in the ISTI.22.6. Possible antidoping rule violations of Article 6 will be assessed in conformity with the ISTI and the Whereabouts-annex.22.7. If possible or necessary, the Antidoping Organization will conduct any other investigation into possible antidoping rule violations.22.8. The Dutch Sports Association and the athlete will be notified within twenty-one days from the moment that the Antidoping Organization has established that an antidoping rule violation has been committed, unless these Rules (or an annex forming part of these Rules) stipulate/stipulates another period.Article 23B-sample analysis23.1. If a sample is divided into an A-part (the A-sample) and a B-part (the B-sample), the athlete is entitled, in case of an adverse analytical finding in the A-sample, to have the B-sample analyzed, provided he has indicated in a timely and correct fashion that he wishes to make use of this right in accordance with the provisions in this Article. The Antidoping Organization will advise the athlete in writing of (i) this right, (ii) the period within which he must indicate whether he wishes to make us of this right, and (iii) the consequences if he fails to do so in a timely and/or correct fashion.23.2. The Antidoping Organization may attach conditions to the athlete’s right to analysis of the B-sample referred to in the previous paragraph, including the payment by the athlete of the costs of the analysis of the B-sample prior to the execution of this analysis. The Antidoping Organization will advise the athlete in writing of these conditions. If the athlete fails to meet these conditions in a timely and complete fashion, the athlete is deemed to waive his/her right to the analysis of the B-sample, by which the finding of the investigation of the A-sample becomes final, and be deemed an adverse analytical finding.23.3. The laboratory sets the date, the time and the location where the B-sample will be analyzed. The Antidoping Organization will inform the athlete thereof in writing.23.4. The athlete and/or a person designated by him or her, as well as the prosecutor, the International Federation and/or the organization initiating and directing the sample collection, may, at their own expense, be present when the B-sample is analyzed in the laboratory. The impossibility of being present at the analysis of the B-sample will not invalidate the finding of the analysis of the B-sample. The ISL may set (further) rules regarding the presence of persons at the analysis of the B-sample, as well as in respect of the rights of the athlete in this regard. If the ISL deviates in this issue from the provisions in these Rules, the rules in the ISL will take precedence.23.5. If the finding of the investigation of the B-sample does not confirm the finding of the investigation of the A-sample, there is an atypical finding.23.6. If the finding of the investigation of the B-sample confirms the finding of the investigation of the A-sample, there is an adverse analytical finding.Article 24 Communicating control findings24.1. If the test results indicate a negative finding and do not indicate a possible antidoping rule violation, the Antidoping Organization will inform the athlete and the Dutch Sports Association in writing of the outcome of the investigation of the A-sample.24.2. If after the review as referred to in Article 22 and after any further analysis, the Antidoping Organization is of the opinion that an antidoping rule has been violated, the Antidoping Organization will notify the athlete, the Dutch Sports Association and the prosecutor within twenty-one days following this finding in writing, by registered letter, of:the adverse analytical finding (if any);which antidoping rule violation(s) may have been committed;the athlete’s right to request a copy of the information that the laboratory must provide under the ISL; andthe rights as referred to in Article 23.1, as well as any conditions as referred to in Article 23.24.3. The Antidoping Organization will notify the athlete, the Dutch Sports Association and the prosecutor in writing of the finding of the analysis of the B-sample within twenty-one days after its receipt, by registered letter. Article 14 of the World Antidoping Code contains further rules regarding the notification of test results to parties involved, in any case including the relevant International Federation and WADA.24.4. The Antidoping Organization will not notify any party or athlete of an atypical finding until any required further analysis has been completed and the Antidoping Organization has decided that an antidoping rule has been violated. This procedure will only vary if the Antidoping Organization receives a request from:the Dutch Sports Association, regarding an expiring deadline for the composition of a national team for an international competition or event; and/orthe organizer of an event shortly before commencement of the event, asking whether further analysis is required following an atypical finding regarding any athlete.In such cases, the Antidoping Organization will only disclose the name of the athlete if this athlete is included in a list of (participating) athletes provided by the Dutch Sports Association and/or the organizer of an event. Before notifying the Dutch Sports Association and/or the organizer of an event, the Antidoping Organization will first notify the athlete.24.5. The Antidoping Organization will notify the Dutch Sports Association and the athlete, with due observance of the provisions in these Rules, as soon as possible in writing of the further analysis, its execution and the result thereof.24.6. The circumstance that the athlete has been notified of an adverse finding, does not mean that with regard to the sample collection and the testing thereof:definitely no antidoping rule violation of Article 3 has been committed. Reanalysis or (other) further analysis may at any later moment lead to the establishment that there is an adverse analytical finding after all; andno disciplinary action can be taken with regard to the athlete on the basis of an antidoping rule violation of Article 3, or any other antidoping rule violation.24.7. If periods referred to in this Article are exceeded, this will not result in the inadmissibility of the antidoping rule violation. It may, however, result in the application of Article 51.2.Article 25 Review of atypical findings25.1. The Antidoping Organization can direct any investigation into a sample that is necessary to find out if any antidoping rule has been violated. This may involve an atypical finding or an investigation referred to under an International Standard or another document adopted by WADA. If a laboratory reports an atypical finding, the Antidoping Organization should first assess if there is (i) an applicable relevant TUE and/or (ii) a deviation within the meaning of Article 34.2 and/or Article 34.4.25.2. The Antidoping Organization can direct the analysis of the B-sample before further analysis is completed. In that case, the Antidoping Organization must notify the athlete prior to the analysis of the B-sample in the manner described in Article 23.3.25.3. If in combination with an atypical finding, one or more non-specific substances and/or prohibited methods (in prohibited quantities) are found in the A-sample, the disciplinary panel may assume that the non-specific substance and/or prohibited method found is present, even if the atypical finding has not been investigated yet. In such a case, the Antidoping Organization will decide if the further analysis referred to in these Rules and/or the prohibited list will be conducted (immediately) or not.Article 26 Disciplinary measures26.1.Disciplinary measures in antidoping rule violations are only stipulated in these Rules, even if such measures in the rules of another sports association (i) have a different name, such as interim measure or provisional suspension, and (ii) are imposed by a disciplinary tribunal.26.2.If a disciplinary measure is imposed, this means that the athlete:is barred from participation in any match, competition and/or event under the auspices of the Dutch Sports Association;is not allowed to be part of any national selection and/or national team;will not be selected for any national selection, national team and/or any other (international) representation of the Dutch Sports Association, neither on an individual, nor on a team basis;is not allowed to provide training, nor to attend or undergo any training approved by and/or organized under the auspices of the Dutch Sports Association or an organization that is a member of the Dutch Sports Association, or in any other way affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association. This includes training at the Dutch Sports Association, training at a club or sports association affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association or any other legal person affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association, training under the management or coaching of a person employed by the Dutch Sports Association (as a volunteer or otherwise), as well as training with a person who has a trainer’s license of equivalent document; andis not allowed to carry out coaching activities at training sessions and/or matches.26.3. If an A-sample shows a preliminary adverse analytical finding, the Board will impose a disciplinary measure on the athlete immediately after receipt of the notification referred to in Article 24.2, unless the preliminary adverse analytical finding is related to a specific substance and/or a contaminated product, in which case Article 26.4 applies.26.4. If an A-sample contains a specific substance and/or a contaminated product resulting in a preliminary adverse analytical finding, the Board can, at the request of the prosecutor, impose a disciplinary measure on the athlete, if:there is a reasonable chance that before long, the athlete will again test positively for the same substance in connection with (the preparation for) a match, competition and/or event;it is likely that the athlete on account of an antidoping rule violation is imposed any period of ineligibility; and/orArticle 5 or Article 17.6 is breached.26.5. In the event of antidoping rule violations not covered by Article 26.3 or Article 26.4, the Board may, at the request of the prosecutor, impose a disciplinary measure if it considers such a measure desirable or necessary in the interest of the Dutch Sports Association.26.6. In cases other than those referred to in Article 26.3 the Board may, at the request of the prosecutor, impose a disciplinary measure following the assessment and notification as described in the previous Articles, but prior to a hearing within the scope of the disciplinary proceedings.26.7. The Board may delegate the power to impose disciplinary measures referred to in the previous paragraphs of this Article to (for example) an authorized individual board or the director of the Dutch Sports Association.26.8. The Dutch Sports Association must offer the athlete the opportunity of a provisional hearing prior to or within twenty-one days after having imposed the disciplinary measure.26.9. The Board, or the person authorized under Article 26.7 who has imposed a disciplinary measure, will notify the athlete within ten days from the date on which the decision to impose a disciplinary measure was taken, of this measure by registered letter. In said letter the Dutch Sports Association will inform the athlete of (i) the consequences of the disciplinary measure, (ii) when this comes into effect, and (iii) his/her right to a provisional hearing, unless the provisional hearing has already taken place. At the same time, the Dutch Sports Association will send the Antidoping Organization and the prosecutor a copy of this letter. If within seven working days of receipt of the decision to impose the disciplinary measure, the athlete has not indicated in writing that he or she wishes to make use of his/her right to a provisional hearing, he or she will be deemed to have waived this right. If the Dutch Sports Association fails to inform the athlete of his/her right to a provisional hearing, the Dutch Sports Association is obliged, if the athlete has requested the Dutch Sports Association in writing for a provisional hearing, to organize a provisional hearing within twenty-one days after receipt of this request.26.10. The Board or the person authorized under Article 26.7 may, in those cases in which that is required of relevant, e.g. because of the progress in the competition or a selection procedure for an international event, decide to inform other athletes, e.g. one or more relevant teams, associations or other legal persons, of an imposed disciplinary measure. This information will not go into the nature and circumstances of the antidoping rule violation, nor contain any specific information on this subject.26.11. The disciplinary measure will remain in effect until the moment that:the finding of the analysis of the B-sample does not confirm the finding of the analysis of the A-sample;the adverse analytical finding is cancelled as a result of a relevant and valid TUE within the meaning of these Rules and/or the ISTUE;within the context of a provisional hearing, the athlete demonstrates that the analytical findings are probably the result of a contaminated product. To this end the athlete must demonstrate that (i) he has used a product that meets the criteria referred to in Article 1.56, and (ii) that it is more likely that the prohibited substance or method found his/her sample entered his/her body through a contaminated product, than that the prohibited substance or method found in his/her sample entered his/her body in a different way;a competent disciplinary tribunal, body or agency has taken a final decision regarding the antidoping rule violation and has informed the athlete in writing of this decision; orthe decision to impose the disciplinary measure is revoked in the appeal.26.12. If a disciplinary measure is cancelled, the prosecutor will notify the athlete, the Dutch Sports Association and the Antidoping Organization of this in writing as soon as possible, at any rate within ten days after the disciplinary measure has been cancelled.26.13.If for several reasons or antidoping rule violations a disciplinary measure has been imposed, the disciplinary measure will remain in effect even if the investigation of the B-sample does not confirm the investigation of the A-sample.26.14. In those cases in which the athlete or the athlete’s team has been removed from a match, competition or event on the basis of these Rules, and the analysis of the B-sample does not confirm the analysis of the A-sample, the athlete or the team may continue his/their participation in the competition following the notification referred to in Article 26.12, if that is possible without (further) influencing the course of the match, the event or the competition.26.15. The circumstance that a disciplinary measure has not been imposed in conformity with the provisions in this Article, does not affect the finding that an antidoping rule violation has been committed.26.16.In all cases in which the Antidoping Organization or the prosecutor has notified the athlete in writing of an antidoping rule violation that does not result in the imposition of a disciplinary measure, the athlete must be given the opportunity to accept a disciplinary measure voluntarily, pending the arbitration of the antidoping rule violation.Article 27Acceptance of antidoping rule violations and sanctions27.1. If an antidoping rule violation has been committed, and the Antidoping Organization has notified the athlete of this in writing, the Antidoping Organization may make the athlete a sanction proposal. If the athlete agrees to this proposal, this means that:he accepts the accusation in respect of the commission of the relevant antidoping rule violation;he accepts the consequences thereof, including in any case the invalidation of competitive results (if that is the case);he accepts the sanction proposal, including in any case the duration of the period of ineligibility, as well as the effective date of the period of ineligibility; andhe accepts all consequences of the ineligibility.27.2. Insofar as not restricted by these Rules and/or the World Antidoping Code, the Antidoping Organization is completely free to determine the proposal referred to in the previous paragraph, as well as any relevant condition(s). The proposed sanction must be in keeping with the provisions of the World Antidoping Code and these Rules.27.3. If an athlete accepts the sanction proposal of the Antidoping Organization, the Antidoping Organization must inform all parties with right to appeal of this acceptance in conformity with Article 60. The athlete who accepts the sanction proposal in writing cannot appeal the accepted sanction.27.4. If an athlete accepts the sanction proposal of the Antidoping Organization, no further results management will be conducted and no disciplinary action will be taken.27.5. If Article 46 is applied, the Antidoping Organization will first determine what the penalty would be without application of Article 46, before determining in accordance with Article 46 (and, where required, with WADA’s consent) which part of the period of ineligibility can be suspended pursuant to the application of Article 46.27.6. The prosecutor is not authorized to make a sanction proposal.Title VI Disciplinary proceedingsArticle 28 General28.1. Disciplinary actions, hearings, determining sanctions and imposing sanctions will all be conducted in accordance with the provisions in these Rules and applicable disciplinary law, unless (i) these Rules provide otherwise, or (ii) these aspects of the results management are conducted by another ADO.28.2. If an athlete is involved, an International Federation may transfer the disciplinary hearing of an antidoping rule violation to the Antidoping Organization and the Dutch Sports Association.28.3. Antidoping rule violations involving athletes may, if not dealt with by the Dutch Sports Association, be dealt with by any authorized ADO. In such cases the Antidoping Organization is entitled, to ensure procedural confidentiality, to postpone the reporting of these cases to the Dutch Sports Association until the disciplinary hearing is completed.28.4. If, at the time of an antidoping rule violation occurring, the person involved comes under the definition of athlete and/or support personnel, these Rules will apply to him in full for the duration of the (disciplinary) proceedings of such antidoping rule violation, including any appeal cases, even if one or more changes in his/her status have taken place, e.g. on termination his/her membership with the Dutch Sports Association and/or the termination of a contract or employment contract.28.5. If a disciplinary tribunal definitively decides that it is not competent to hear an antidoping rule violation, or rules that the Dutch Sports Association and/or the Antidoping Organization do not have jurisdiction in the case under consideration, this competence or this jurisdiction will automatically be vested in the International Federation.Article 29Bringing actions against antidoping rule violations (reporting)29.1. If the Antidoping Organization believes that an antidoping rule violation has taken place, the Antidoping Organization will report this in writing, stating the reasons to the prosecutor and the Board, unless:the Antidoping Organization reports the antidoping rule violation to another relevant ADO;Article 27 is applied;Article 46 is applied; orthe Antidoping Organization decides that within the context of one or more (other) on-going investigations, the antidoping rule violation cannot be reported yet.29.2. If the Antidoping Organization itself brings an action against an antidoping rule violation to the competent disciplinary tribunal, the Antidoping Organization may inform the prosecutor and the Board of the antidoping rule violation prior to this report. However, the Antidoping Organization is not obliged to do so.29.3. The prosecutor and/or the Antidoping Organization bring actions against antidoping rule violations to the competent disciplinary tribunal. The Antidoping Organization will, in principle, only use this competence if and insofar as the prosecutor fails to report an antidoping rule violation.29.4. Any antidoping rule violation must be reported within the time limit referred to in Article 55. Insofar as violations of Article 3 are involved, the Board must report the antidoping rule violation within six weeks after the Antidoping Organization or the International Federation (if the sample collection was conducted by or on behalf of the International Federation) informed the Dutch Sports Association in writing of the adverse analytical finding. If this period is exceeded, the Antidoping Organization may file the report. In such a case, a four-week period applies to the Antidoping Organization’s reporting, from the date on which the Antidoping Organization first heard of the Board’s failure to report.29.5. Unless the time limit referred to in Article 55 has been exceeded, any failure to report an antidoping rule violation will not result in an inadmissibility of the report. It may, however, result in the application of Article 51.2.29.6. The prosecutor, or, if applicable, the Antidoping Organization, must inform the athlete as soon as possible, yet no later than within twenty-one days from the date of the report, by registered letter of the action being brought regarding the antidoping rule violation. If only the Antidoping Organization files the report, the Antidoping Organization will simultaneously inform the athlete, the Dutch Sports Association and the prosecutor in writing, unless this has already been done by means of the report. If the antidoping rule violation is reported to the prosecutor, the prosecutor has the option to give further reasons for the report in writing.29.7. In cases in which Article 27 or Article 46 is applied, an antidoping rule violation will not be reported, unless the contract concluded with the athlete is terminated. If a contract concluded under the application of Article 27 or Article 46 is terminated, the period referred to in Article 29.4 does not apply to the reporting of the antidoping rule violation. In such a case, the time limit referred to in Article 55 applies, which in that case commences on the date on which the Antidoping Organization has been informed in writing of the termination of said contract.29.8. In the event of serious violations of Article 9 and/or Article 10, a report will also be filed to the competent authorities outside the Dutch Sports Association.29.9. Before notifying an athlete that an antidoping rule violation has been committed, the Antidoping Organization will verify if the athlete has committed an antidoping rule violation before.Article 30 Hearing antidoping rule violations30.1. The disciplinary hearing of antidoping rule violations must meet the following principles:a timely and fair hearing;a fair and impartial (disciplinary) body or arbitral tribunal;a timely, written, reasoned decision, specifically including an explanation of the evidence, deviating from the (standard) period of ineligibility and the commencement of any period of ineligibility imposed.30.2. The athlete may at all times waive his/her right to a hearing.30.3. The athlete against whom an antidoping rule violation has been filed, must inform the prosecutor within fourteen days after receipt of the written report if he wants to exercise his/her right to a hearing. If the athlete does not state within this period that he/she wishes to exercise this right, he/she will be deemed to waive his/her right to a hearing.30.4. The Dutch Sports Association will send the written, reasoned decision of the disciplinary tribunal to the athlete, the Antidoping Organization and the International Federation. The Antidoping Organization will notify WADA and, if applicable, other relevant ADOs of the decision.30.5. If the athlete, the Antidoping Organization, WADA and any other ADO with a right to appeal in antidoping rule violations agree in writing in conformity with Article 60, antidoping rule violations may be heard directly at CAS, without any requirement for a prior hearing. An Anti-Doping Organization that wants to participate in the CAS hearing as a party or as an observer, may condition its approval of a single hearing on being granted that right.30.6. When antidoping rule violations are heard, the Antidoping Organization and the prosecutor are authorized, also in appeal, to participate and speak in the oral hearing by the competent disciplinary tribunal, as well as any other hearing organized as part of the hearing of an antidoping rule violation. The same rights and obligations apply to the Antidoping Organization and the prosecutor during the hearing as to the athlete. That which is set out in this provision also applies to the provisional hearing.30.7. If an (independent) expert has been in contact with the athlete and/or his/her representative for the purposes of an antidoping rule violation, this expert cannot/can no longer act as an independent expert in the disciplinary hearing of the relevant antidoping rule violation.30.8. The parties in an antidoping rule violation are only permitted to communicate with the independent expert via the disciplinary tribunal hearing the relevant antidoping rule violation. The information nevertheless communicated directly to the independent expert by a party, will not be considered in the (further) disciplinary hearing of the antidoping rule violation, and cannot be submitted again.30.9. The Antidoping Organization will receive all documents, correspondence and information in respect of the disciplinary hearing that the athlete, the prosecutor, and the disciplinary tribunal receive. The Dutch Sports Association or the disciplinary tribunal will simultaneously provide the Antidoping Organization with all documents, correspondence and information as the other parties involved, as well as all documents, correspondence and information sent by the athlete to the Dutch Sports Association and/or the disciplinary tribunal.Article 31Opinion31.1The Antidoping Organization is authorized to deliver a written opinion in an antidoping rule violation no later than twenty-eight days following the defense filed by the athlete in which it states its position to the competent disciplinary tribunal. The Antidoping Organization may also submit documents when delivering an opinion. When the athlete has not filed a defense, the Antidoping Organization is authorized to deliver an opinion after the period for filing a defense has expired.31.2. The athlete will receive the Antidoping Organization’s opinion and any documents it submitted as soon as possible from the prosecutor.31.3. If a decision of the competent disciplinary tribunal has been appealed, the Antidoping Organization may deliver an opinion and submit documents at the latest prior to the oral hearing, even if the Antidoping Organization is the party that has lodged the appeal.31.4. If the Antidoping Organization delivers an opinion or lodges an appeal in an antidoping rule violation, staff members of the Antidoping Organization cannot be heard in that antidoping rule violation as experts, but can be as witnesses.Article 32 Default of appearanceIf an antidoping rule violation has been committed and the athlete’s (correct) address details are not known, even after (i) reasonable attempts have been made to obtain these, including contacting his/her national sports association and/or the relevant International Federation, and (ii) the period referred to in Article 30.3 has expired, the disciplinary hearing or hearing of the antidoping rule violation will take place in conformity with these Rules without communication with, input and/or participation of the athlete, without resulting in a conflict with the provisions in Article 30 or any other provision of these Rules.Title VII Proof of dopingArticle 33Burden of proof33.1. The burden of proof that an antidoping rule violation has been committed rests on the prosecutor on behalf of the Dutch Sports Association, or on an ADO (in cases in which this ADO has lodged an appeal against a decision as referred to in Article 59.1). The proof of the antidoping rule violation will have been delivered, if the Board has made this antidoping rule violation sufficiently probable to the competent disciplinary tribunal, taking the seriousness of the accusation made into account. In all cases, this burden of proof is more than just an assessment of probability, but less than incontrovertibly conclusive evidence.33.2. Evidence put forward by an athlete accused of having committed an antidoping rule violation will be weighed on the basis of an assessment of probability.33.3. If these Rules place the burden of proof with the prosecutor or (the Board of) the Dutch Sports Association, the Antidoping Organization is explicitly permitted to provide the required evidence besides or instead of (the prosecutor of the Board of) the Dutch Sports Association. This applies to antidoping rule violations reported by the Antidoping Organization, or an appeal lodged by it, as well as to antidoping rule violations reported by the Board.33.4. One single item of proof may suffice to establish that an antidoping rule violation has been committed, provided this proof meets the conditions set to in these Rules.Article 34Methods for establishing facts and presumptions34.1. Facts related to antidoping rule violations may be established by any reliable means, including analytical findings, a (single) confession, a statement of a doping control official and the comparison and linking of (data obtained from) DNA-material. The reliability of proof is assessed by the competent disciplinary tribunal.34.2. WADA-accredited or WADA-approved laboratories are presumed to have conducted the analysis of samples and custodial procedures in accordance with the International Standard for Laboratories. The athlete may rebut this presumption by establishing that (i) a departure from this International Standard for Laboratories occurred, which (ii) could reasonably have caused the adverse analytical finding or the factual basis for the antidoping rule violation.34.3. lf the athlete rebuts the assumption referred to in the previous paragraph by showing that a departure from the ISL occurred which could reasonably have caused the adverse analytical find, then the Board will have the burden to establish that this departure did not cause the adverse analytical finding.34.4. Departures from these Rules and/or any International Standard, which did not cause an adverse analytical finding or other (presumed) antidoping rule violation, will not invalidate such evidence or results. If the athlete establishes that a departure from any International Standard which could reasonably have caused an anti-doping rule violation based on an adverse analytical finding or the factual basis for the antidoping rule violation, the Board will have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the adverse analytical finding or the factual basis for the antidoping rule violation.34.5. If the athlete has not established a departure from any International Standard in an antidoping rule violation, or that any departure from an International Standard caused the adverse analytical finding or the factual basis for the antidoping rule violation, the adverse analytical finding constitutes reliable and irrefutable evidence of an antidoping rule violation.34.6. The uncontested facts in judicial proceedings, as well as the facts established by the adjudicating body will apply as irrefutable evidence in an antidoping rule violation, unless the decision in said proceedings has not yet become definitive, or principles of due process have been demonstrably breached in said proceedings.34.7. If, during the disciplinary hearing of an antidoping rule violation, the athlete refuses to appear before the competent disciplinary tribunal (in person, by telephone of via a video link) in a situation in which compelling evidence has been submitted to him, such as test results and/or statements of doping control officials, further to a request made within a reasonable period prior to the hearing, and refuses to answer questions of the disciplinary tribunal or the relevant ADOs with regard to this antidoping rule violation, the disciplinary tribunal may draw a negative conclusion from this for the athlete.34.8. Any analytical methods and/or decision limits approved by WADA are deemed to be scientifically valid.34.9. Any Athlete seeking to rebut this presumption of scientific validity will, as a condition precedent to any such challenge, (i) first notify WADA of the challenge and (ii) the basis of the challenge. CAS, on its own initiative, may also inform WADA of any such challenge. At WADA’s request the CAS panel will appoint an appropriate scientific expert to assist the panel in its evaluation of the challenge. Within ten days of (i) receipt of the notification by the athlete or CAS of the challenge, and (ii) the receipt of the CAS file WADA will also have the right:to intervene as a party;to appear as amicus curiae; orotherwise provide evidence in such proceedings.Title VIII Competition sanctions and competition resultsArticle 35Automatic disqualification of competition resultsAn antidoping rule violation subsequent to an in-competition sample collection in a sport that is not a team sport will automatically result in the disqualification of the competition results obtained in the relevant competition.Article 36Competition sanctions and penalties36.1.In addition to the provisions of Article 35, an antidoping rule violation committed during or in connection with an event may, upon the decision of the ruling body of the event, lead to disqualification of all of the athlete’s individual results obtained in that event. Factors to be included in considering whether to disqualify other results in an event might for instance include the seriousness of the athlete’s antidoping rule violation and whether the athlete tested negative in the other competitions.36.2. If the athlete establishes that he or she bears no fault or negligence for the violation, the Athlete’sindividual results in the other competitions will not be disqualified, unless the athlete’s results in competitions other than the competition in which the anti-doping rule violation occurred were likely to have been affected by the Athlete’s anti-doping rule violation.36.3. In addition to the provisions in the previous paragraphs, all other competitive results of the athlete from the date on which a positive sample was collected, until the moment the resulting disciplinary measure (if any), or (if no disciplinary measure was taken) the period of ineligibility starts, are disqualified, unless fairness requires otherwise.36.4. Any breach of Article 7 by an association and/or legal person affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association will be punished with a fine to be determined by the competent disciplinary tribunal. If, as a result of said inadequate cooperation, a planned sample collection out-of-competition cannot be conducted, this circumstance will also be deemed an antidoping rule violation of Article 7 by the athlete on whom the planned sample collections could not be carried out.36.5. All competitive results obtained during a period of ineligibility, including those obtained during a period of ineligibility imposed with retroactive effect, will be disqualified.36.6. All competitive results obtained by an athlete in breach of Article 19.4 and/or Article 19.6 are automatically disqualified.36.7. Any breach by an association and/or legal person affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association of Article 17.6 will be punished with a fine to be determined by the competent disciplinary tribunal.Title IX SanctionsArticle 37Sanctions for violations of Articles 3, 4 and 837.1. Subject to any reduction or suspension of the sanction in accordance with Articles 44 through 49, the period of ineligibility for a first antidoping rule violation of Article 3, Article 4 or Article 8 will be:four years if the antidoping rule violation does not involve a specific substance, unless the athlete can establish that the antidoping rule violation was not intentional;four years if the antidoping rule violation involves a specific substance and the ADO can establish that the antidoping rule violation the athlete was intentional.37.2. If the antidoping rule violation does not involve a specific substance, and the athlete can establish that the antidoping rule violation was not intentional, the period of ineligibility will be two years.37.3. If the antidoping rule violation involved a specific substance, and the ADO cannot establish that the antidoping rule violation was intentional, the period of ineligibility will be two years.Article 38Intention for the application of Title IX and Title X38.1. For the application of Title IX, the term ‘intentional’ relates to the intention to cheat. Consequently, there can only be intention if the following requirements are met:the athlete engaged in conduct which he knew constituted an antidoping rule violation; and/orthe athlete engaged in conduct of which he knew that there might be a significant risk that the conduct might (i) constitute an antidoping rule violation or (ii) result in an antidoping rule violation, and the athlete manifestly disregarded that risk.38.2.An antidoping rule violation resulting from an adverse analytical finding for a substance which is only prohibited in-competition, may, until proven otherwise, not be deemed intentional if the athlete can establish that:the prohibited substance is a specific substance; andthe prohibited substance was used out-of-competition.38.3. An antidoping rule violation resulting from an adverse analytical find for a substance which is only prohibited in-competition, will not be deemed intentional, if:the substance is not a specific substance; andthe athlete can establish that the prohibited substance was used out-of-competition in a context unrelated to sport performance.38.4. All references in Title IX to the term ‘intent’ are related to references to intent within the meaning of Article 38.1.Article 39Sanctions for violations of Article 5 and Article 7Subject to any reduction or suspension of the sanction in accordance with Articles 44 through 49, the period of ineligibility for a first antidoping rule violation of Article 5 or Article 7 will be four years, unless the athlete, insofar as an antidoping rule violation of Article 5 is involved, can establish that the commission of the antidoping rule violation was not intentional, in which case the period of ineligibility will be two years. Article 40Sanctions for violations of Article 640.1. The period of ineligibility for a first antidoping rule violation of Article 6 will be two years, which period, depending on the athlete’s degree of fault, may be reduced to a period of ineligibility of at least one year.40.2. The option of reducing the standard period of ineligibility of two years to one year referred to in the previous paragraph, is not available, if:the athlete has repeatedly changed his/her whereabouts data at the last moment; and/orother conduct is involved that raises a serious suspicion that the athlete was trying to avoid being available for testing.40.3. Factors to be taken into consideration in the application of these Rules when assessing the athlete’s degree of fault are, for example (i) the athlete’s experience, (ii) the circumstance that the athlete was a minor when he committed the antidoping rule violation, (iii) the risk of which the athlete should have been aware, (iv) the care and caution exercised by the athlete in relation to what should have been the perceived level of risk, and (v) special considerations, such as a handicap. In assessing the athlete’s degree of fault, the circumstances considered must be specific and relevant to explain the athlete’s departure from the standard of behavior expected from a top sportsman or woman.Article 41Sanctions for violations of Articles 9 and 1041.1. Subject to any reduction or suspension of the sanction in accordance with the Articles 44 through 49, the period of ineligibility imposed for a first violation of Article 9 or Article 10 will be at least four years and to lifetime ineligibility, depending on the seriousness of the violation.41.2. A violation of Article 9 or Article 10 involving a minor will be considered a particularly serious violation, and result in lifetime ineligibility, if:the antidoping rule violation was committed by support personnel; andthe antidoping rule violation is not related to a specific substance.Article 42Sanctions for violations of Article 11Subject to reduction of suspension of the sanction in accordance with the Articles 44 through 49, the period of ineligibility for a first antidoping rule violation of Article 11 will be at least two years and up to four years, depending on the seriousness of the violation.Article 43Sanctions for violations of Article 12The period of ineligibility for a first violation of Article 12 will be two years, which period, depending on the athlete’s degree of fault and other circumstances of the case, can be reduced to a period of ineligibility of at least one year.Title X Sanctions and sanction reductionArticle 44No fault or negligence 44.1. There is no fault or negligence if the athlete has established that he/she did not know or suspect, and could not reasonably have known or suspected, even with the exercise of utmost caution, that he/she had:used, taken or been administered the prohibited substance and/or prohibited method; orotherwise violated an antidoping rule.44.2.If the antidoping rule violation is related to a violation of Article 3, the additional requirement applies that there can only be no fault or negligence, if the athlete has established how the prohibited substance and/or the prohibited method entered his/her body. This additional requirement does not apply if the athlete was a minor at the time of committing the antidoping rule violation.44.3. If an athlete establishes in an individual case that he/she bears no fault or negligence in respect of an antidoping rule violation, the applicable period of ineligibility will be eliminated.44.4.This Article only applies in exceptional cases, e.g. if an athlete has proved that the antidoping rule violation, despite all due care and the precautions taken by him/her, is the result of sabotage by a third party. 44.5. This Article does not apply to the following cases:an adverse analytical finding resulting from the ingestion, use, administration and/or application of a contaminated product, a mislabeled or a contaminated nutritional supplement. Athletes are themselves responsible for what they use or ingest, and they are required to be aware of the risks regarding the use of nutritional supplements;the administration of a prohibited substance or a prohibited method by an athlete support person without disclosure to the athlete. Athletes are themselves responsible for the choice of their support personnel, and for advising their athlete support person that they cannot be given any prohibited substance or prohibited method; and/orsabotage of the athlete’s food or drink by a spouse, a housemate or (other) family member, a coach or another person within the athlete’s circle of associates. Athletes are themselves responsible for what they use or ingest, as well as for the conduct of the persons to whom they entrust access to their food and drink.44.6. This Article is only applicable to the determination of the sanction, and not to the determination of whether an antidoping rule violation has been committed.44.7. Contrary to the other provisions of Title X where the term ‘fault’ is used, the definition of fault explicitly does not apply to Article 44, nor do the factors in Article 40.3 determining the athlete’s degree of fault.Article 45No significant fault or negligence45.1. There is no significant fault or negligence, if the athlete establishing that his/her fault or negligence, when viewed in the totality of the circumstances and taking into account the criteria referred to in Article 44.1, was not significant in relation to the antidoping rule violation.45.2. If the antidoping rule violation involves a violation of Article 3, the additional requirement applies that there can only be no significant fault or negligence, if the athlete has also established how the prohibited substance and/or the prohibited method entered his/her body. This additional requirement does not apply if the athlete was a minor at the time of the commissioning of the antidoping rule violation.45.3. If there is (i) an antidoping rule violation of Article 3, Article 4 or Article 8, (ii) the antidoping rule violation involves a specific substance, and (iii) the athlete has established that there is no significant degree of fault or negligence on his/her part, then the sanction is at least:a reprimand and no period of ineligibility; andat most, two years of ineligibility, depending on the athlete’s degree of fault.45.4. If there is (i) an antidoping rule violation of Article 3, Article 4 or Article 8, (ii) the athlete has established that there is no significant degree of fault or negligence on his/her part, and (iii) the athlete has established that the adverse analytical finding was caused by a contaminated product, then the sanction is at least:a reprimand and no period of ineligibility; andat most, two years of ineligibility,depending on the athlete’s degree of fault.45.5. If in an individual case to which Article 45.3 and Article 45.4 do not apply, an athlete has established that he/she bears no significant fault or negligence for committing an antidoping rule violation, the period of ineligibility otherwise applicable can only be reduced depending on the athlete’s degree of fault, but never be less than half the period of ineligibility otherwise applicable. If the otherwise applicable period of ineligibility is a lifetime, the reduced period of ineligibility under this Article may be no less than eight years. 45.6. Article 45.5 can only be applied if the following conditions have been met:the antidoping rule violation is related to Article 3, Article 4 or Article 8, bears no connection to a specific substance, and Article 45.3 and Article 45.4 are not applicable, and the athlete has established that there was no intent on his/her part in committing the antidoping rule violation; orthe antidoping rule violation is related to Article 6, and the athlete has established that that there was no intent on his/her part in committing the antidoping rule violation.45.7. Depending on the unique facts of a particular case, any of the referenced illustrations in Article 44.5 could result in the establishment that there is no significant degree of fault or negligence on the athlete’s part, provided that the athlete has fulfilled all applicable conditions of Article 45.45.8. For cannabinoids, including metabolites and its markers, an athlete may establish no significant fault or negligence by demonstrating that the context of the use was clearly unrelated to sport performance. Article 45, paragraph 2 applies in full.45.9.This Article is only applicable to the determination of the sanction, and not to the determination of whether an antidoping rule violation has been committed.45.10. If, in the event of an antidoping rule violation of Article 3, Article 4 and Article 8 in respect of a specific substance, the Dutch Sports Association, the Antidoping Organization and/or another ADO has/have established that there was intent on the part of the athlete:Article 45 cannot be applied; andthe period of ineligibility will be four years, unless Article 46, Article 47 and/or Article 48 is/are applied.45.11. If, in the event of an antidoping rule violation of Article 3, Article 4 and Article 8 the in respect of a specific substance Dutch Sports Association, the Antidoping Organization and/or another ADO, has not established intent on the part of the athlete:Article 45 can be applied, but only if the athlete can establish that he qualifies for a reduced sanction under Article 45; andthe sanction is at least a reprimand and a period of ineligibility of two years at most, depending on the athlete’s fault. A reduced sanction will only be possible if (i) the athlete has established that there is no significant fault or negligence on his/her part, and (ii) the athlete has met the requirements for the application of Article 45.3, Article 45.4 or Article 45.5. If the athlete fails to meet these requirements, the period of ineligibility will be two years, unless Article 46, Article 47 and/or Article 48 is/are applied.45.12. If, in the event of an antidoping rule violation of Article 3, Article 4 and Article 8 in respect of a non-specific substance, the athlete has not established that there was no intent on his/her part:Article 45 cannot be applied; andthe period of ineligibility will be four years, unless Article 46, Article 47 and/or Article 48 is/are applied.45.13.If, in the event of an antidoping rule violation of Article 3, Article 4 and Article 8 in respect of a non-specific substance, the athlete has established that there was no intent on his/her part:Article 45 can be applied, but only if the athlete can establish that he/she qualifies for a reduced sanction under Article 45; andthe period of ineligibility can be reduced depending on the athlete’s fault, yet will never be less than the half the period of ineligibility otherwise applicable. The sanction can only be reduced if (i) the athlete has established that there is no significant fault or negligence on his/her part, and (ii) the athlete has met the requirements for the application of Article 45.3, Article 45.4 or Article 45.5. If the athlete has not met these requirements, the period of ineligibility will be two years, unless Article 46, Article 47 and/or Article 48 is/are applied.45.14.For the application of Article 45:the competent disciplinary tribunal must first assess which provision applies: Article 45.3, Article 45.4 or Article 45.5;the competent disciplinary tribunal must then assess if the athlete has established no significant fault or negligence on his/her part in the antidoping rule violation. To this end, the competent disciplinary tribunal must apply Article 45.1, Article 1.45 and Article 40.3 in conjunction with Article 44.1. If the antidoping rule violation involves an antidoping rule violation of Article 3, the competent disciplinary tribunal must apply Article 45.2;if the competent disciplinary tribunal is of the opinion that the athlete has established that he/she qualifies for a reduced sanction under Article 45, it must determine the reduced sanction on the basis of the athlete’s fault, whereby the authorized disciplinary tribunal must apply Article 1.45 and Article 40.3.45.15. Article 45 cannot be applied in the following situations:an antidoping rule violation has been committed whereby the intent is an element of the antidoping rule violation (for example Article 7, Article 9, Article 10 and Article 11);an antidoping rule violation has been committed whereby the intent is an element of a specific sanction (for example Article 37); and a possible reduction of the sanction applies based on the athlete’s fault (see Article 40.1 and Article 43). Article 46Substantial assistance46.1.If the results management is conducted in whole or in part by the Antidoping Organization, the Antidoping Organization may, prior to a final appellate decision of the competent disciplinary tribunal in an antidoping rule violation, or prior to the expiration of the applicable time to appeal to the decision of the competent disciplinary tribunal, suspend a part of the period of ineligibility imposed, if the athlete has provided substantial support to an ADO, criminal authority and/or professional disciplinary body.46.2.If the results management is conducted in whole or in part by the Antidoping Organization, the Antidoping Organization may, after (i) a final appellate decision of the competent disciplinary tribunal in an antidoping rule violation has been taken, or (ii) the applicable time to appeal to the decision of the competent disciplinary tribunal has expired, only suspend a part of the otherwise applicable period of ineligibility, if:a.the athlete has provided substantial assistance; andb.both the International Federation and WADA approve this decision of the Antidoping Organization. 46.3.Substantial assistance exists if the following conditions are met:a.the athlete has provided all information regarding one or more antidoping rule violations, correctly, fully, and in a timely fashion, by means of or accompanied by a written statement signed by him;b.the athlete grants his full cooperation to the investigation into, as well as to the prosecution or disciplinary action regarding the antidoping violation to which the information provided by him is related, including by appearing as a witness at a hearing, if requested to do so by the ADO, the competent disciplinary tribunal, a court, an arbitrator, or an arbitral tribunal;c.the information provided by the athlete must be credible, and must comprise (i) an important part of any case which is initiated, or (ii), if no case is initiated, must have provided a sufficient basis on which a case could have been brought; andd.the assistance must result in:(i)the ADO discovering or bringing forward an antidoping rule violation, which antidoping case or antidoping rule violation was committed by a person other than the athlete who provided the substantial assistance; or(ii)a criminal body or professional disciplinary body discovering or bringing forward a criminal offence or the breach of professional rules, which criminal offence or breach was committed by a person other than the athlete who provided the substantial assistance; and(iii)the information provided by the athlete providing substantial assistance is made available to the Antidoping Organization or the other ADO to which substantial assistance was provided.46.4. The extent to which the otherwise applicable period of ineligibility may be suspended under Article 46 will be based on (i) the seriousness of the antidoping rule violation committed by the athlete, and (ii) the significance of the substantial assistance provided by the athlete to the effort to eliminate doping in sport. However, the extent to which the otherwise applicable period of ineligibility may be suspended, will never exceed three quarters of the period of ineligibility that would have been imposed without the application of Article 46. If, without the application of Article 46, the otherwise applicable period of ineligibility would be a lifetime, the non-suspended period of ineligibility must be no less than eight years. 46.5. At the request of (i) the ADO with the results management responsibility or (ii) a person who has, or has been asserted to have committed an antidoping rule violation, WADA may agree at any stage of the results management process, including after a final appellate decision, to what it considers to be an appropriate suspension of the period of ineligibility otherwise applicable under Article 46. 46.6. In unique circumstances, in exchange for the provision of substantial assistance, WADA may agree to a suspension of (a) the full period of ineligibility and (b) the imposition and/or execution of other consequences of the commission of an antidoping rule violation (such as the disqualification of competitive results, the imposition of a disciplinary measure, the imposition of financial consequences and sanctions) greater than those otherwise provided under Article 46. In such cases, WADA may agree to (i) no period of ineligibility imposed or yet to be imposed), (ii) no return of prize money, and/or (iii) no payment of fines or costs.46.7. Even after a period of ineligibility has been suspended, the Antidoping Organization will assess to what extent the assistance provided by the athlete meets, and continues to meet, the conditions referred to in Article 46.46.8.If the ADO, which has suspended the period of ineligibility, decides that the assistance provided by the athlete does not meet or no longer meets the conditions referred to in Article 46, the suspension will end, and:a.if an antidoping rule violation has not yet been reported, will bring forward and/or report the antidoping rule violation;b.if the results management has been suspended because of the substantial assistance initially provided, the prescribed steps of the results management will be initiated or continued; and/orc.the period of ineligibility imposed by the competent disciplinary tribunal without application of Article 46 will go into effect. This period commences the moment that the ADO has informed both the athlete and the Dutch Sports Association in writing of said decision.46.9. A decision by an authorized ADO not to bring into effect (again) a suspended period of ineligibility, notwithstanding that the assistance provided by the athlete does not meet or no longer meets the conditions referred to in Article 46, may be appealed by the parties with the right to appeal in accordance with Article 60. The same applies to a decision of an ADO to bring the period of ineligibility into effect (again). There is no appeal against a decision of WADA under Article 46.5 or Article 46.6.46.10.If an ADO suspends any part of an otherwise applicable sanction because of substantial assistance, the other ADOs with a right to appeal under Article 60 will be notified, with justification for the decision. In unique circumstances where WADA determines that it would be in the best interest of the antidoping campaign, WADA may authorize an ADO to enter into a confidentiality agreement limiting or delaying the disclosure of the substantial assistance agreement and/or the nature of the substantial assistance being provided.46.11. Suspending all or part of the period of ineligibility can only be effected under Article 46.Article 47Admission of an antidoping rule violation in the absence of other evidence47.1.If:a.an athlete voluntarily admits the commissioning of an antidoping rule violation as referred to in Title II before having received notice of a sample collection which could establish an antidoping rule violation, or (in the case of antidoping rule violations other than Article 3) before receiving a first notice of a possible antidoping rule violation from the Antidoping Organization, the Dutch Sports Association, the International Federation and/or an foreign national sports association or NADO, andb.that admission is the only reliable evidence of the violation at the time of admission, the period of ineligibility may be reduced, but to no less than half the otherwise applicable period of ineligibility. 47.2.This article is intended to apply when an athlete comes forward and voluntarily admits to an antidoping rule violation in circumstances where no ADO is aware that an antidoping rule violation might have been committed. It is not intended to apply to circumstances where the admission occurs after the athlete believes that he or she is about to be caught.47.3. The degree by which the period of ineligibility is reduced should be based on the likelihood that the athlete would have been caught had he or she not come forward voluntarily.Article 48 Admission of an antidoping rule violation after notification48.1. An athlete on whom a period of ineligibility of four years may be imposed under Article 37 or Article 39, may:a.by promptly admitting that he has committed the antidoping rule violation of which he is accused following written notification of the antidoping rule violation by the Antidoping Organization (or the Dutch Sports Association in those cases where the Dutch Sports Association is the first party to notify the athlete in writing); andb.after review by and after prior approval of both the Antidoping Organization and WADA,qualify for a reduction of the sanction, whereby with regard to the period of ineligibility, the remaining period of ineligibility in all cases must be at least two years. The degree in which the sanction can be reduced, depends on (i) the seriousness of the relevant antidoping rule violation, and (ii) the athlete’s fault.48.2.To be eligible for the reduction referred to in the previous paragraph, the athlete must inform the Antidoping Organization and/or the Dutch Sports Association in writing of the prompt admission referred to in the previous paragraph. The Antidoping Organization and the Dutch Sports Association have a mutual duty of disclosure.Article 49Several options for a reduction49.1. For the application of Article 49:a.the athlete must first establish that he is eligible for a reduction on the basis of more than one of the following articles: Article 44, Article 45, Article 46, Article 47 and Article 48; andb.prior to any application of Article 46, Article 47 or Article 48, the applicable period of ineligibility must first be established based on (i) the provisions in Title IX, and (ii) Article 44 and Article 45.49.2. If the athlete has established that he is eligible for a reduction or suspension under Article 46, Article 47 and/or Article 48, the period of ineligibility may be reduced, but not be less than a quarter of the period established under Article 49.1(b).Article 50Multiple violations50.1.For an athlete’s second antidoping rule violation, the period of ineligibility will be the greater of the following periods:a.six months;b.one half of the period of ineligibility imposed for the first antidoping rule violation, not taking into account any reduction under Article 46, Article 47 or Article 48; orc.twice the period of ineligibility otherwise applicable to the second antidoping rule violation, treated as if it were a first antidoping rule violation, not taking into account any reduction under Article 46, Article 47 or Article 48. 50.2.50.2The period of ineligibility established above may be reduced under and in accordance with any application of Article 46, Article 47 or Article 48.50.3. A third antidoping rule violation will always result in a lifetime period of ineligibility, unless the athlete can establish that the third antidoping rule violation fulfils the application of Article 44 or Article 45, or involves a violation of Article 6, in which case the period of ineligibility will be from eight years to lifetime. 50.4.An antidoping rule violation for which an athlete has established no fault or negligence within the meaning of Article 44 will not be considered a prior violation for purposes of Article 50.50.5.For purposes of imposing sanctions under Article 50, an antidoping rule violation will only be considered a second violation, if the Antidoping Organization can establish that the athlete committed the second antidoping rule violation after (i) the athlete received notice pursuant to the first antidoping rule violation, or (ii) the Antidoping Organization made reasonable efforts to give him notice of the first anti-doping rule violation. If the Antidoping Organization cannot establish this, the violations will be considered together as one single first violation and the sanction imposed will be based on the violation that carries the more severe sanction. 50.6.If after the imposition of a sanction for a first antidoping rule violation, an ADO discovers facts involving an antidoping rule violation by the athlete which occurred prior to notification regarding the first antidoping rule violation, the ADO will impose an additional sanction based on the sanction that could have been imposed if the two violations had been adjudicated at the same time. Results obtained in all competitions dating back to the earlier antidoping rule violation will be disqualified.50.7.For purposes of this Article a second or subsequent antidoping rule violation must have taken place within ten years of the previous violation or violations.Title XI Other sanction provisionsArticle 51Commencement of the period of ineligibility51.1.Unless otherwise provided in these Rules, the period of ineligibility will start on (i) the date of the final hearing decision providing for ineligibility, (ii) the date accepted for the purposes of the application of Article 27 or Article 46, or (iii) the date on which the period of ineligibility is otherwise imposed.51.2.Where there have been substantial delays in the procedures referred to in Title V and/or Title VI that are not attributable to the athlete, the body imposing the sanction may start the period of ineligibility at an earlier date than referred to in the previous paragraph, commencing as early as the date on which the antidoping rule violation (last) occurred. In case of a violation of Article 3 this means the date on which the sample resulting in the adverse analytical finding was collected. All competitive results achieved during the period of ineligibility, including competitive results achieved during a period of ineligibility with retroactive effect, will be disqualified.51.3.In cases of antidoping rule violations other than under Article 3, the time required for an ADO to discover and develop sufficient facts to establish an antidoping rule violation may be lengthy. In these circumstances, the flexibility provided in this article to start the sanction at an earlier date is not applicable.51.4.Where the athlete promptly (which in all events for an athlete means: before the athlete competes again) admits an antidoping rule violation as referred to in Title II after being confronted with the antidoping rule violation by the Antidoping Organization, the Dutch Sports Association, the International Federation and/or a foreign national sports association or NADO, the period of ineligibility may start as early as the date on which the relevant antidoping rule violation (last) occurred. In case of an antidoping rule violation of Article 3 this means the date on which the sample resulting in the adverse analytical finding was collected. However, the athlete will serve at least half the period of ineligibility going forward from (i) the date of a hearing decision imposing a sanction, or (ii) the date on which the athlete formally accepts the sanction, or (iii) the date on which the sanction is otherwise imposed. This article will not apply in cases in which Article 48 is applied.51.5. The period of ineligibility will, for the purposes of imposing a disciplinary measure, be credited against the total period of ineligibility to be served, unless the athlete has not strictly observed this disciplinary measure. The same applies to a provisional measure, provisional suspension or provisional ineligibility imposed by a competent (disciplinary) body.51.6.If the athlete (i) after having received notice in respect of an antidoping rule violation referred to in Article 24.2, and (ii) prior to him being imposed a disciplinary measure, informs the ADO with the results management authority in writing that he will voluntarily respect the provisions in Article 26.2, and from that moment, even after a disciplinary measure has been taken against him, strictly respects the provisions in Article 26.2, this period of (voluntary, self-imposed) ineligibility will be credited against the total period of ineligibility imposed. The athlete must send the letter referred to in this paragraph to both the prosecutor and the Antidoping Organization. If the letter is only sent to the prosecutor, the prosecutor will send the letter to the Antidoping Organization and vice versa. The relevant International Federation and WADA will also be informed.51.7.The period in which (i) no disciplinary measure is imposed and (ii) there is self-imposed ineligibility (and the compliance thereof) as referred to in the previous paragraph, cannot be deducted from an (ultimately) imposed period of ineligibility, regardless of the circumstance that the athlete (voluntarily) waived participation in matches, competitions and/or events.51.8. Other than the options described in Article 51 there are no options to start a period of ineligibility earlier than the date referred to in Article 51.1.51.9. In team sports, where a period of ineligibility is imposed upon a team, unless fairness requires otherwise, the period of ineligibility will start on:a.the date of the final hearing decision; orb.if the right to a hearing is waived, on the date ineligibility is accepted or otherwise imposed, unless fairness requires otherwise.Any period of team provisional suspension, whether imposed or voluntarily accepted (in accordance with the relevant provisions in Article 51.6) will be credited against the total period of ineligibility to be served.51.10. It is not possible to impose the sanctions referred in these Rules conditionally in whole or in part, unless explicitly provided otherwise.51.11. Any present or absent performance-enhancing effect of a prohibited substance and/or prohibited method will not be taken into consideration when assessing:a.whether an antidoping rule violation was committed; andb.the determination of the sanction to be imposed for an antidoping rule violation.Article 52Status during ineligibility52.1. Imposition of a period of ineligibility means that the athlete, from the moment that this sanction has been imposed:a.is excluded from participating in any match, competition and/or event organized under the auspices of the Dutch Sports Association, nor any other activity within the Dutch Sports Association (including clubs, teams or other legal persons affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association, or otherwise connected with the Dutch Sports Association);b.is excluded from participating in a competition or sports activities approved or organized by or under the auspices of a professional sports association or organization;c.is excluded from participating in a competition or sports activities approved or organized by or under the auspices of a national or international event organizer;d.is excluded from participating in any sports activity funded by a governmental agency on a national or elite level;e.is not allowed to act or participate in any capacity within the Dutch Sports Association (including clubs, teams or other legal persons affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association), nor allowed to receive any (financial) compensation as referred to in Article 52.2;f.is not allowed to give any training, nor attend or undergo any training approved by and/or organized under the auspices of (i) the Dutch Sports Association or (ii) of a legal person and/or organization that is a member of the Dutch Sports Association, or otherwise affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association. This includes training at the Dutch Sports Association, training at a club, association or other legal person affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association, as well as training under the supervision or guidance of a person employed by or as a volunteer or otherwise for the Dutch Sports Association;g.is not allowed to perform any coaching activities at training sessions and/or matches organized under the auspices of the Dutch Sports Association (including clubs, teams or other legal persons affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association, or otherwise connected with the Dutch Sports Association).However, the athlete is allowed to participate in anti-doping education and/or rehabilitation programs. 52.2. An antidoping rule violation to which no reduced sanction has been applied under Article 44 or Article 45, will result in the full or partial withdrawal of the financial support, compensation and other sport-related benefits which the athlete receives from the Dutch Sports Association.52.3.An athlete subject to a period of ineligibility longer than four years may, after completing four years of the period of ineligibility, participate as an athlete in local sports events not sanctioned or otherwise under the jurisdiction of an ADO, if:a.these events do not directly or indirectly offer the possibility for qualification to compete in a national championship, international event of international competition;b.these events could not directly or indirect accumulate points required for qualification for, or participation in a national championship, international event or international competition; andc.the athlete does not in any capacity work with minors during these local sports events.52.4. After the expiry of the period of ineligibility, an athlete will only acquire the right to participate in competitions from the moment that he has repaid the prize money and paid costs awarded. The priority in paying costs awarded by CAS and forfeiture of prize money is as follows:a.first, payment of costs awarded by CAS;b.secondly, reallocation of forfeited prize money to other athletes if provided for in the rules of the applicable International Federation; andc.thirdly, reimbursement of the expenses of the ADO that conducted the results management in the case. 52.5. If, during a period of ineligibility, the athlete participates in an activity and/or capacity referred to in Article 52.1:a.any competitive results obtained will be disqualified automatically; andb.a new period of ineligibility will be imposed on the athlete, equal in length to the original period of ineligibility. This new period of ineligibility will become effective from the moment that the period of ineligibility originally imposed on the athlete ends. This new period of ineligibility may be reduced, depending on the athlete’s fault and other circumstances of the case. The Antidoping Organization determines whether the athlete has failed to respect Article 52.1, determines and imposes the new period of ineligibility, and determines if the athlete is eligible for any reduction of the new period of ineligibility. The decision of the Antidoping Organization may be appealed in accordance with the provisions in Title XII.52.6. As an exception to Article 52.1, an athlete may return to train with a team or to use the facilities of a club or a sports association affiliated with the Dutch Sports Association during the shorter of the following periods:a.the last two months of the period of ineligibility imposed on the athlete; orb.the last quarter of the period of ineligibility imposed on the athlete.Article 53Consequences to teams (if applicable)53.1. If more than two members of a team in a team sport are found to have committed an antidoping rule violation during or in connection with an event, the ruling body of the event will impose one or more appropriate sanctions on the team, e.g. disqualification of the relevant team, disqualification of one or more event and/or competition results of this team, and/or the loss of medals, points and prizes/prize money. The Antidoping Organization will inform the ruling body of these matters, unless the Dutch Sports Association has already done this correctly, fully and in a timely fashion.53.2.The Dutch Sports Association may, for events organized under its auspices, establish consequences for teams stricter than those referred to in the previous paragraph for purposes of the event.53.3. In sports which are not team sports, but where awards are given to teams, disqualification, as well other disciplinary action against the team when one or more team members have committed antidoping rule violations, will be as provided in the applicable rules of the International Federation.53.4.Where, in conformity with Title V, more than one member of a team has been notified of a possible antidoping rule violation in connection with an event, the Dutch Sports Association (if the event was organized by or under the auspices of the Dutch Sports Association) will conduct (appropriate) target testing of the team during the event period.Article 54Review54.1. If, with regard to a prohibited substance or prohibited method, a prohibition has been formulated, and this prohibition was adjusted or lifted afterwards, an athlete who was imposed a sanction under the original decision may request a review. A review will be conducted for the benefit of the athlete.54.2. The athlete sends the authorized disciplinary tribunal a written, reasoned request for a review, which will send the request to the Antidoping Organization.54.3. The request to review will be dealt with in writing. The Antidoping Organization has the right to deliver an opinion.54.4. A decision by the authorized disciplinary tribunal may be appealed in conformity with Title XII.Article 55Limitation periodNo antidoping rule violation proceeding may be commenced against an athlete, unless the athlete has been notified in writing of the antidoping rule violation in conformity with the provisions in Title V, or notification has been reasonably attempted within ten years from the date on which the antidoping rule violation is asserted to have occurred.Article 56Mutual recognitionSubject to the right of appeal, the Dutch Sports Association will recognize, respect and adopt TUEs granted by an authorized ADO or other organization or body, hearing results or other final adjudications which are consistent with the World Antidoping Code.Article 57Disclosure57.1. Article 14 of the World Antidoping Code contains rules in respect of:municating with and among ADO’s in antidoping rule violations, as well as the contents of this communication;municating with the athlete in antidoping rule violations, as well as the contents of this communication;c.publishing and/or otherwise disclosing (i) hearing decisions in antidoping rule violations, and (ii) sanctions imposed for the commission of an antidoping rule violation; all in accordance with national legislation.57.2. The World Antidoping Code contains rules in respect of:a.the confidentiality to be observed when communicating antidoping rule violations;b.the decisions in respect of antidoping rule violations which must comprise the full reasons, including, if applicable, a justification for why the maximum potential sanction was not imposed; andc.the ADOs having a right to appeal a decision may request a copy of the full case file pertaining to the decision, before deciding within fifteen days of receipt thereof whether to appeal the decision or award.57.3. The Antidoping Organization and the Dutch Sports Association are guided by these rules, unless national legislation and regulation do not permit this. Title XII AppealsArticle 58Appeals 58.1. Decisions made under these Rules may only be appealed in the manner described therein.58.2.Such decisions will remain in effect while under appeal, unless the disciplinary body competent to hear the appeal (hereinafter: the appellate body) orders otherwise.58.3.The factual and legal grounds can be fully reviewed on appeal. The appellate body is competent to increase the sanction imposed in the first instance to the maximum period of ineligibility allowed under these Rules, or to reduce it to the minimum period of ineligibility.Article 59Decisions subject to appeal59.1.The following decisions may be appealed:a.a decision that an antidoping rule violation was committed or a decision that an antidoping rule violation was not committed;b.a decision that no antidoping rule violation was committed;c.a decision by WADA as referred to in Article 19.5;d.a decision that the Dutch Sports Association, the Antidoping Organization and/or another ADO in an antidoping rule violation is inadmissible. A decision that (i) an antidoping rule violation the time limit has expired or was reported late, and (ii) the Dutch Sports Association and/or the Antidoping Organization having no jurisdiction in an antidoping rule violation, is, for the application of this article, equated with a decision that there is inadmissibility;e.a decision imposing a disciplinary measure;f.a decision taken under Article 52.5;g.a decision taken in breach of Article 26.3, Article 46.11, Article 51.10 or Article 51.11;h.a decision under Article 46 to suspend a period of ineligibility;i.a decision as referred to in Article 46.8, taken by the Antidoping Organization or WADA. If another ADO takes such a decision, the antidoping Code of the relevant ADO applies to that decision, unless the antidoping Rules of the relevant ADO declares the antidoping Rules of the Dutch Sports Association applicable;j.a decision of the Dutch Sports Association not to recognize the decision of another ADO in breach of Article 56;k.a decision that an antidoping rule violation proceeding cannot go forward for procedural reasons;l.a decision by WADA as referred to in Article 21.5, with the proviso that this decision may be appealed exclusively to CAS;m.a decision of an ADO (i) not to bring forward an adverse analytical finding or an atypical finding as an antidoping rule violation, or a decision of an ADO (i) not to go forward with an antidoping rule violation after an investigation under Article 22;n.a decision to impose or not to impose consequences for an antidoping rule violation by (i) imposing a period of ineligibility, (ii) disqualifying competitive results, (iii) imposing financial consequences as referred to in the World Antidoping Code, and/or (iv) disclosure of such decision; ando.a subject to appeal under the ISTI, for the parties referred to in the ISTI.59.2.If, contrary to the requirements of Article 26.3, the Board does not impose a disciplinary measure, this circumstance is, for the application of Article 59, considered to be a decision taken in breach of Article 26.3.59.3. A decision not to repeal a mandatory disciplinary measure is not subject to appeal.59.4. If, after a period of thirty days, an antidoping rule violation has not been reported after WADA has been notified in writing of an athlete’s third whereabouts-failure, this circumstance will, for the application of Title XII, be considered a decision that no antidoping rule violation was committed.Article 60 Right to appeal60.1. A decision by the authorized disciplinary tribunal in an antidoping rule violation competent in the first instance may be appealed at the national-level appeal body, unless there is no option to appeal within the Dutch Sports Association, in which case the decision may be appealed to CAS.60.2. A decision of the national-level appeal body may be appealed to CAS.60.3. The following parties are entitled to appeal a decision of a disciplinary tribunal of the Dutch Sports Association in an antidoping rule violation:a.the athlete who is the subject of the decision being appealed;b.the prosecutor on behalf of the Dutch Sports Association;c.the relevant International Federation and any other organization authorized to direct sample collections according to whose antidoping rules a sanction could have been imposed;d.the Antidoping Organization;e.the NADO of the country where the athlete is a national or the country where the athlete resides;f.the IOC or the IPC, as applicable, where the decision may have an effect in relation to the Olympic Games or the Paralympic Games, including decisions affecting eligibility for the Olympic Games or Paralympic Games; andg.WADA.60.4.In antidoping rule violation cases (i) regarding athletes (support personnel) who, at the time that the antidoping rule violation occurred, were included in the registered testing pool of the International Federation, or (ii) arising from participation in a competition and/or event organized under the auspices of the International Federation, the parties referred to in Article 60 are permitted to appeal the decision of the disciplinary tribunal in the first instance directly to CAS.60.5.CAS rules and conditions apply to an appeal to CAS.60.6. If a party entitled to appeal has appealed a decision to CAS, any other party is explicitly entitled to bring cross appeals and other subsequent appeals. If a party wishes to use this right, such party must file a cross appeal or subsequent appeal to CAS with the party’s answer.Article 61Appeals/interventions by WADA61.1.Where WADA has a right to appeal under Title XII, and no party referred to in Article 60.3 other than WADA has appealed a final decision, WADA may appeal such decision directly to CAS without having to exhaust other remedies.61.2.WADA has the right to intervene in a pending antidoping rule violation if the authorized disciplinary tribunal or appellate body has failed to render a decision within a reasonable deadline set by WADA. The moment that said deadline expires, this will be considered a decision of the authorized disciplinary tribunal or appellate body that no antidoping rule violation was committed. In that case, WADA may elect to appeal directly to CAS. If the CAS hearing panel determines that (i) an antidoping rule violation was committed, and (ii) that WADA acted reasonably in electing to appeal directly to CAS, the Dutch Sports Association must reimburse WADA’s costs, including attorney fees, for the appeal to CAS.Article 62Appeals relating to TUEs62.1. A decision rejecting a TUE may be subject to appeal as defined Article 59.1. The athlete is the only person entitled to appeal such decision. Title XII applies mutatis mutandis, unless provided otherwise in these Rules.62.2. If an International Federation decides not to recognize a TUE granted by the Antidoping Organization and the athlete or the Antidoping Organization submits such decision to WADA, WADA must review said decision by the International Federation. If an International Federation decides to grant a TUE and the Antidoping Organization submits this decision WADA, WADA must review said decision by the International Federation. WADA may review any other TUE decisions at any time, whether upon request by those affected, (including the athlete, the Antidoping Organization and the International Federation), or on its own initiative. If the TUE decision being reviewed meets the criteria set out in the ISTUE, WADA will not interfere with it. If the TUE decision does not meet the criteria set out in the ISTUE, WADA will amend or reverse said decision.62.3. Any TUE decision by WADA may be appealed exclusively to CAS. The parties entitled to appeal are the athlete, the relevant International Federation and the Antidoping Organization.62.4.Any TUE decision by an International Federation (or by the Antidoping Organization, if the Antidoping Organization has agreed in writing with said International Federation to consider TUEs submitted by athletes to this International Federation on behalf of this International Federation) that is not reviewed by WADA, or that is reviewed by WADA but not reversed upon review, may be appealed exclusively to CAS. The parties entitled to appeal are the athlete, and the Antidoping Organization.62.5. TUEs reviewed by WADA at any time, will remain in force until WADA has informed the athlete in writing of this decision.62.6.If a decision on an application for a grant/recognition or review of a TUE has not been taken within the applicable time limits, this will, for the application of Article 62, be considered a denial of the application.Article 63Filing deadlines for appeals63.1. The filing deadline for an appeal is twenty-one days from the date that the party entitled to appeal has been informed in writing of the decision subject to appeal.63.2. The filing deadline for an appeal filed by WADA or for an intervention to be made by WADA will be the latter of the following deadlines:a.twenty-one days from the day on which any other party in the case could have appealed; orb.twenty-one days after WADA’s receipt of the complete file relating to the decision, including a translation of such decision.63.3.The provisions in Article 63.2 under b with regard to WADA, also apply to the filing deadline applicable to the Antidoping Organization. Title XIII Remaining provisionsArticle 64 Roles and responsibilities of the Antidoping Organization64.1.The Antidoping Organization is the NADO of The Netherlands as defined in these Rules and the World Antidoping Code. 64.2.The Antidoping Organization has the following roles, responsibilities and powers:a.giving antidoping education;b.adopting the appendices forming part of these Rules (except for the prohibited list);c.tracing, and conducting investigations into possible antidoping rule violations at home and abroad, and in connection with this, organizing hearings, talks and interviews, and exchanging knowledge and information with domestic and foreign ADOs;d.monitoring and supervising the correct application of and compliance with these Rules and the World Antidoping Code, and, where necessary, correcting and intervening, e.g. by using the right to appeal;e.providing evidence where applicable;f.managing the national registered testing pool;g.administering whereabouts information, as well as applying the Whereabouts Appendix;h.processing, handling and reviewing TUE-applications, granting TUEs, as well as applying the TUE-appendix;i.planning and conducting sample collections, having samples analyzed;j.conducting sample collection in conformity with these Rules;k.conducting results management;l.maintaining contact with athletes and/or other persons, or their representatives, specifically, but not exclusively within the context of the application of Article 27 and Article 46;m.where applicable, bringing forward antidoping rule violations;n.taking part in the disciplinary hearing of antidoping rule violations;o.with regard to possible antidoping rule violations, cooperating with the police, the judicial authorities, Customs, the Healthcare Inspectorate and other judicial bodies and institutions (such as e.g. Customs, the Public Prosecution Service, the police and the Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Organization, and foreign equivalents of these organizations), as well as exchanging information with these bodies;p.administering biological passports, including the planning and collection of samples, laboratory analysis, the management of results, the appointment of a commission assessing the relevant data, and all other aspects as described in the applicable WADA guidelines for such passports, and the Appendix in respect of the biological passport (if the Antidoping Organization adopts such an appendix);q.investigating (i) the relevant athlete support personnel in the case of an antidoping rule violation involving a minor, and (ii) athlete support personnel that works with several athletes found to have committed an antidoping rule violation; r.granting full cooperation to investigations initiated by WADA into (i) antidoping rule violations, and (ii) activities that could facilitate doping;s.monitoring the correct application and/or enforcement of sanctions imposed for antidoping rule violations of these Rules;t.handling cases in which a sanction imposed on an athlete for an antidoping rule violation of these Rules is not (fully) observed;u.all other roles, responsibilities and powers in the Code and/or the International Standards imposed on the Antidoping Organization in its capacity as (N)ADO;v.performing all other activities and roles that contribute to reducing the use of doping in sports; andw.gathering and investigating information, including personal information, on possible violations of an antidoping code.64.3. The powers pertaining to effectively and efficiently adopting and implementing the roles and responsibilities referred to in this article are vested in the Antidoping Organization.Article 65Roles and responsibilities of athletes Subject to the provisions in the other Titles of these Rules, each athlete has the following roles and responsibilities:a.to comply with all applicable anti-doping policies and rules;b.to be available for sample collection at all times;c.to prevent a prohibited substance or prohibited method from entering his/her body;d.to prevent that he/she commits an antidoping rule violation;e.to inform support personnel, including medical personnel (i) of the athlete’s obligation not to use or be administered prohibited substances and prohibited methods, and (ii) the responsibility of the athlete support personnel to take responsibility to make sure that no prohibited substances and/or prohibited methods enter the body of the athlete they assist, treat and/or work with;f.to disclose to their National Antidoping Organization and International Federation any decision by a non-signatory finding that the athlete committed an antidoping rule violation within the previous ten years; andg.to cooperate with ADOs investigating (i) antidoping rule violations, and (ii) activities that might facilitate doping.Article 66Roles and responsibilities of support personnelSubject to the provisions in the other Titles of these Rules, the athlete support personnel will have the following roles and responsibilities:a.to cooperate with the athlete testing program;b.to use his or her influence on athlete values and behavior to foster antidoping attitudes;c.to prevent a prohibited substance or prohibited method from entering the athletes’ bodies supported by the support personnel and/or with which the athlete support personnel works;d.to prevent it from committing an antidoping rule violation;e.to disclose to their National Antidoping Organization and International Federation any decision by a non-signatory finding that it committed an antidoping rule violation within the previous ten years;f.to cooperate with ADOs investigating (i) antidoping rule violations, and (ii) activities that might facilitate doping;g.to be knowledgeable on and comply with all antidoping policies and rules applicable to them or the athletes whom they support;h.to grant cooperation to the application of and compliance with these Rules; andi.to grant cooperation to the implementation of the roles and responsibilities of the Antidoping Organization as referred to in Article 64.Article 67Roles and responsibilities of the Dutch Sports Association Subject to the provisions in the other Titles of these Rules, the Dutch Sports Association will have the following roles and responsibilities:a.to cooperate with the athlete testing program;b.to cooperate with ADOs investigating (i) antidoping rule violations, and (ii) activities that might facilitate doping;c.to immediately disclose to their National Antidoping Organization and International Federation any information that might indicate or possibly be related to an antidoping rule violation;d.to grant cooperation to the application of and compliance with these Rules; ande.to grant cooperation to the implementation of the roles and responsibilities of the Antidoping Organization as referred to in Article 64.Article 68Privacy68.1. Image or sound recording of sample collection, as well as showing, displaying or disclosing image and/or sound recordings of sample collections, is only permitted after the consent of the athlete and the anti-doping organization with results management responsibility.68.2. The private data of the athlete, including his whereabouts information, TUE data and control findings, may be sent or are sent to the Dutch Sports Association, the anti-doping organization with the results management responsibility, the laboratory and the relevant ADOs, including the Antidoping Organization, the International Federations, as well as WADA.68.3. The Antidoping Organization and the Dutch Sports Association may disseminate information regarding control findings and/or antidoping rule violations in accordance with the applicable provisions in these Rules, the World Antidoping Code and/or one or more International Standards.Article 69Costs69.1.As regards the performance of the analysis, the athlete will pay the costs of the investigation of the B sample referred to in Article 23, unless:a.the analysis of the B-sample is performed at the request of the Antidoping Organization, in which case the said costs, irrespective of the analytical finding, will be borne by the Antidoping Organization; orb.the analysis of the B-sample finding does not confirm the A-sample finding, in which case the said costs will be borne by the Antidoping Organization.69.2. The other costs incurred by the athlete for the purposes of having the B-sample analyzed, such as the presence of the athlete himself and/or a person designated by him in the laboratory, will be borne by the athlete.69.3.The costs incurred by the athlete in connection with his defense in an antidoping rule violation, will be for his own account, unless an authorized disciplinary tribunal, hearing panel or court decides otherwise.69.4.Costs incurred in connection with the investigation of an atypical finding will, in conformity with the provisions under these Rules and/or the prohibited list, be borne by the Antidoping Organization, unless such investigation establishes that the athlete has committed an antidoping rule violation, in which case the costs will be for the athlete’s account.69.5.The costs related to the laboratory documentation package referred to in Article 24.2 under c (both in respect of the A-sample and the B-sample), will be for the athlete’s account, unless an authorized disciplinary tribunal decides that the athlete has not committed an antidoping rule violation, in which case these costs will be for the account of the Antidoping Organization.Article 70Relation between regulations70.1. This antidoping Code was set up, as far as possible, as an independently applicable Code. Consequently, other regulations, rules and/or decisions by other sports associations will only apply insofar as these have an additional effect on and do not conflict with this antidoping Code.70.2.The application of these Rules will not be limited by other regulations of the Dutch Sports Association. Consequently, the disciplinary laws of the Dutch Sports Association will only apply, insofar as these disciplinary laws do not conflict with the substance and/or the purport of this antidoping code.Article 71Interpretation71.1.In relevant cases, these Rules will be interpreted on the basis of the English version at the time of the doping control, or, if there was no doping control, the (alleged) occurrence of the antidoping rule violation under the applicable World Antidoping Code and/or International Standards.71.2.The World Antidoping Code will be interpreted as an independent and autonomous text, and not by reference to the existing law or statutes, unless these Rules explicitly provide otherwise.71.3. The headings used for the various parts and articles in these Rules are for convenience only and will not be deemed part of the substance of the articles, or to affect in any way the interpretation of the corresponding provisions.71.4. These Rules have been drawn up in accordance with the applicable provisions in the World Antidoping Code and corresponding International Standards, and are to be interpreted in a manner that is consistent with these provisions of the World Antidoping Code and International Standards.71.5. The explanations to the provisions in the World Antidoping Code are part of these Rules, and are to be used when interpreting these Rules. The same applies to an explanation to these Rules as drawn up by the Antidoping Organization, if such an explanation is available.71.6. All time limits applicable to results management commence on the first following day after the athlete, the Dutch Sports Association and/or the Antidoping Organization have received the notification or information in writing.71.7. In the case of written correspondence, the date of receipt will be deemed to be seven days after the date of dispatch.71.8.The purpose, scope and organization of the World Antidoping Program and the appendices belonging to the World Antidoping Code (in respect of definitions (Appendix 1) and examples (Appendix 2)) are an integral part of the World Antidoping Code.71.9. The World Antidoping Code must be used when interpreting these Rules. In the event of any conflict between these Rules and the World Antidoping Code, the World Antidoping Code will prevail.Article 72Transitional provisions 72.1.Article 50 and Article 55 are procedural provisions that may be applied retroactively.72.2. The World Antidoping Code will not apply retroactively to antidoping rule violations pending before the current World Antidoping Code took effect. However, pre-Code antidoping rule violations would continue to count as first violations or second violations for purposes of determining sanction under the antidoping code.72.3. For purposes of assessing the period of ineligibility for a second violation under Article 50, where the sanction for the first violation was determined based on pre-2015 Code rules, the period of ineligibility which would have been assessed for that first violation had 2015 Code rules been applicable, will be applied.Article 73Appendices73.1. The appendices accompanying these Rules and forming part of these Rules will, with the exception of the prohibited list, be adopted by the Antidoping Organization.73.2. The appendices referred to in the previous paragraph will come into effect from the moment they have been posted on the website of the Dutch Antidoping Organization: dopingautoriteit.nl. The prohibited list will, on each occasion, come into effect on a date to be determined by WADA.Article 74Concluding provisionIn cases not provided for in these Rules, the Board will decide. In such cases the Board will consult the Antidoping Organization before taking a decision. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download