体育运动的全球反兴奋剂监管制度:多中心性和混合性的挑战与紧张

E. Windholz
{"title":"体育运动的全球反兴奋剂监管制度:多中心性和混合性的挑战与紧张","authors":"E. Windholz","doi":"10.53300/001c.38798","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sport has developed a global anti-doping regulatory regime of great sophistication. It is polycentric — operating at both the national and international level — and hybrid — combining contractual, criminal and administrative tools with public and private enforcement mechanisms. The regime is not without its challenges and tensions, however. Functional, democratic and normative challenges abound. There also are tensions that arise from nesting private transnational regulatory regimes in public domestic legal structures. This article critically examines these challenges and tensions using the Essendon Football Club v Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority as its case study. That case considered the legality and propriety of the Australian Football League collaborating with the state’s anti-doping regulatory authority to investigate alleged anti-doping rule violations in breach of the World Anti-Doping Code. This case illustrates the challenges that arise when the interests of players, clubs, competition administrators, national regulators, and sports’ global guardians, do not align. The article establishes that while sports’ global anti-doping regime has proven itself to be functionally stable, opportunities exist to broaden the regime’s democratic credentials to give other stakeholders a more meaningful voice. Doing so would not only improve the regime’s sense of fairness and justice, it also might improve its effectiveness.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sports’ Global Anti-Doping Regulatory Regime: The Challenges and Tensions of Polycentricity and Hybridity\",\"authors\":\"E. Windholz\",\"doi\":\"10.53300/001c.38798\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Sport has developed a global anti-doping regulatory regime of great sophistication. It is polycentric — operating at both the national and international level — and hybrid — combining contractual, criminal and administrative tools with public and private enforcement mechanisms. The regime is not without its challenges and tensions, however. Functional, democratic and normative challenges abound. There also are tensions that arise from nesting private transnational regulatory regimes in public domestic legal structures. This article critically examines these challenges and tensions using the Essendon Football Club v Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority as its case study. That case considered the legality and propriety of the Australian Football League collaborating with the state’s anti-doping regulatory authority to investigate alleged anti-doping rule violations in breach of the World Anti-Doping Code. This case illustrates the challenges that arise when the interests of players, clubs, competition administrators, national regulators, and sports’ global guardians, do not align. The article establishes that while sports’ global anti-doping regime has proven itself to be functionally stable, opportunities exist to broaden the regime’s democratic credentials to give other stakeholders a more meaningful voice. Doing so would not only improve the regime’s sense of fairness and justice, it also might improve its effectiveness.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33279,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bond Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bond Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.38798\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bond Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.38798","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

体育运动已经制定了一个非常完善的全球反兴奋剂监管制度。它是多中心的——在国家和国际层面运作——混合的——将合同、刑事和行政工具与公共和私人执法机制相结合。然而,该政权并非没有挑战和紧张局势。功能、民主和规范方面的挑战比比皆是。私人跨国监管制度嵌套在国内公共法律结构中也产生了紧张关系。本文以埃森登足球俱乐部诉澳大利亚体育反兴奋剂机构一案为案例,对这些挑战和紧张局势进行了批判性的研究。该案件考虑了澳大利亚足球联盟与该州反兴奋剂监管机构合作调查涉嫌违反《世界反兴奋剂法》的反兴奋剂规则的合法性和适当性。这起案件说明了当球员、俱乐部、竞赛管理人员、国家监管机构和体育全球守护者的利益不一致时会出现的挑战。文章指出,尽管体育的全球反兴奋剂制度已证明其功能稳定,但仍有机会扩大该制度的民主资格,让其他利益相关者有更有意义的发言权。这样做不仅可以提高政权的公平正义感,还可能提高其效力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Sports’ Global Anti-Doping Regulatory Regime: The Challenges and Tensions of Polycentricity and Hybridity
Sport has developed a global anti-doping regulatory regime of great sophistication. It is polycentric — operating at both the national and international level — and hybrid — combining contractual, criminal and administrative tools with public and private enforcement mechanisms. The regime is not without its challenges and tensions, however. Functional, democratic and normative challenges abound. There also are tensions that arise from nesting private transnational regulatory regimes in public domestic legal structures. This article critically examines these challenges and tensions using the Essendon Football Club v Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority as its case study. That case considered the legality and propriety of the Australian Football League collaborating with the state’s anti-doping regulatory authority to investigate alleged anti-doping rule violations in breach of the World Anti-Doping Code. This case illustrates the challenges that arise when the interests of players, clubs, competition administrators, national regulators, and sports’ global guardians, do not align. The article establishes that while sports’ global anti-doping regime has proven itself to be functionally stable, opportunities exist to broaden the regime’s democratic credentials to give other stakeholders a more meaningful voice. Doing so would not only improve the regime’s sense of fairness and justice, it also might improve its effectiveness.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
‘Often Fails to Give Close Attention to Detail’: Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in Criminal Justice Offender Populations A Practitioner’s Perspective Concerning the Links between Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and the Criminal Justice System Understanding the Nature of ADHD and the Vulnerability of Those with the Condition Who Fall Foul of the Criminal Justice System Corporate Purpose and the Misleading Shareholder vs Stakeholder Dichotomy Legal Considerations in Machine-Assisted Decision-Making: Planning and Building as a Case Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1