8.1    Fair Hearings

8.1    Fair Hearings

8.1.1     Fair, Impartial and Operationally Independent Hearing Panel

In New Zealand, the Article 8 first instance hearing responsibilities are undertaken by the Sports Tribunal. The procedural rules of the Sports Tribunal pertaining to the hearing of first instance shall apply, except where in conflict with the Rules, in which case the Rules prevail. The Sports Tribunal will always ensure that the Athlete or other Person is provided with a fair hearing within a reasonable time by a fair, impartial and Operationally Independent hearing panel in compliance with the Code and the International Standard for Results Management.

8.2    Notice of Decisions

8.2    Notice of Decisions 

8.2.1     At the end of the hearing, or promptly thereafter, the Sports Tribunal shall issue a written decision that conforms with Article 9 of the International Standard for Results Management and which includes the full reasons for the decision, the period of Ineligibility imposed, if (and to what extent) any period of Provisional Suspension is credited against the period of Ineligibility imposed, the Disqualification of results under Article 10.10, any forfeiture of medals or prizes, any other relevant Consequences, including Financial Consequences, appeal routes and deadline to appeal, and, if applicable, a justification for why the greatest potential Consequences were not imposed.

8.2.2    The Sports Tribunal shall notify the decision to the Athlete or other Person and the Commission.

8.2.3     The Commission shall notify the decision to other Anti-Doping Organisations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3, and shall promptly report it into ADAMS. The decision may be appealed as provided in Article 13.

8.3     Waiver of Hearing

8.3     Waiver of Hearing

8.3.1     An Athlete or other Person against whom an anti-doping rule violation or violation of Article 10.14.1 is asserted may waive a hearing expressly and agree with the Consequences proposed by the Commission.

8.3.2     However, if the Athlete or other Person against whom an anti-doping rule violation or violation of Article 10.14.1 is asserted fails to dispute that assertion within twenty (20) days of the date of the notice sent by the Commission asserting the violation, then they shall be deemed to have waived a hearing, to have admitted the violation, and to have accepted the proposed Consequences.

8.3.3     In cases where Article 8.3.1 or 8.3.2 applies, a hearing before the Sports Tribunal shall not be required. Instead, the Sports Tribunal shall promptly issue a written decision that conforms with Article 9 of the International Standard for Results Management and which includes the full reasons for the decision, the period of Ineligibility imposed, if (and to what extent) any period of Provisional Suspension is credited against the period of Ineligibility imposed, the Disqualification of results under Article 10.10, any forfeiture of medals or prizes, any other relevant Consequences, including Financial Consequences, appeal routes and deadline to appeal, and, if applicable, a justification for why the greatest potential Consequences were not imposed.

8.3.4    The Sports Tribunal shall notify the decision to the Athlete or other Person and the Commission.

8.3.5    The Commission shall notify that decision to other Anti-Doping Organizations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3, and shall promptly report it into ADAMS. The Commission shall Publicly Disclose that decision in accordance with Article 14.3.2.

8.4    Single Hearing Before CAS

8.4    Single Hearing Before CAS

Anti-doping rule violations or violations of Article 10.14.1 asserted against International-Level Athletes, National-Level Athletes or other Persons may, with the consent of the Athlete or other Person, the Commission (where it has Results Management authority in accordance with Article 7) and WADA, be heard in a single hearing directly at CAS.⁵² 

Footnotes

^{51     [Comment to Article 8: This Article requires that at some point in the Results Management process, the Athlete or other Person shall be provided the opportunity for a timely, fair and impartial hearing. These principles are also found in Article 6.1 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and are principles generally accepted in international law. This Article is not intended to supplant each Anti-Doping Organization’s own rules for hearings but rather to ensure that each Anti-Doping Organization provides a hearing process consistent with these principles.]}

⁵²     [Comment to Article 8.4: In some cases, the combined cost of holding a hearing in the first instance at the international or national level, then rehearing the case de novo before CAS can be very substantial. Where all of the parties identified in this Article are satisfied that their interests will be adequately protected in a single hearing, there is no need for the Athlete or Anti-Doping Organizations to incur the extra expense of two (2) hearings. An Anti-Doping Organization may participate in the CAS hearing as an observer.]