Rivista di Diritto ed Economia dello Sport - Rdes.it

CAS 2005/C/976 & 986, FIFA & WADA 243culpabilité de la personne incriminée?” (translation: Does the competentbody of FIFA have the power to impose a sanction lower than the minimumsanction provided by the WADC, taking into account the circumstances ofthe case and in particular the degree of fault of the person concerned?)171 Answer: FIFA has validly adopted its own Anti-Doping Rules whichare not fully consistent with the WADC. As an association governed bySwiss law, FIFA is free, within the limits of mandatory Swiss law, to determinesuch sanctions on anti-doping violations as it deems appropriate. This includesFIFA’s competence to establish lower minimum sanctions than provided bythe WADC. The competent sanctioning bodies of FIFA are obliged to applythe Anti-Doping Rules of FIFA only and may not take recourse to the WADCalternatively.4. Question sec. 3 para. 1: “L’organe compétent de la FIFA est-il tenu derespecter les prescriptions du C.M.A., même dans l’hypothèse où ellesseraient en contradiction avec les principes généraux du droit applicablesen Suisse et le droit suisse lui-même?” (translation: Shall the competentbody of FIFA comply with the provisions of the WADC, even on theassumption that they would be in contradiction to the general principles oflaw applicable in Switzerland and to Swiss law itself ?)172 Answer: FIFA has validly adopted its own Anti-Doping Rules whichare not fully consistent with the WADC. As an association governed bySwiss law, FIFA is free, within the limits of mandatory Swiss law, to determinesuch sanctions on anti-doping violations it deems appropriate.5. Question sec. 3 para. 2: “Ou au contraire ledit organe de la FIFA doitilobligatoirement tenir compte de ces principes et du droit suisse dans sadémarche?” (translation : Or, on the contrary, is the said FIFA body obligedto take these principles and Swiss law into account?)173 Answer: FIFA is subject to Swiss law and, therefore, bound to complywith mandatory Swiss law including recognized general principles of law.The same applies to the sanctioning bodies of FIFA. However, mandatorySwiss law does not require FIFA to draft its Anti-Doping Rules as it did.6. Question sec. 4 para. 1: “D’une façon générale, la sanction minimaleprévue par le C.M.A. s’impose-t-elle à l’organe compétent de la FIFA poursanctionner un contrevenant au C.M.A.?” (translation : As a general rule, isthe minimum sanction provided by the WADC mandatory to the competentbody of FIFA sanctioning a person breaching the WADC ?)174 Answer: FIFA has validly adopted its own Anti-Doping Rules whichare not fully consistent with the WADC. As an association governed bySwiss law, FIFA is free, within the limits of mandatory Swiss law, to determine