Anti-doping and athletes' rights under EU law: Four-year period of ineligibility as disproportionate sanction?
Abstrakt
In this paper, I argue that a four-year period of ineligibility imposed for a first doping offence violates athletes' rights under EU law. I believe that the effectiveness of the fight against doping, the deterrence effect for athletes considering taking banned substances or using prohibited methods as well as the stricter punishment of real cheaters are logic and legitimate aims, which can justify the restriction on athletes' rights under EU law that a four-year period of ineligibility constitutes.
Nevertheless, I show in this paper that the suitability of a four-year period of ineligibility to achieve the otherwise legitimate objectives is doubtful because it statistically does not lead to decrease of number of anti-doping rules violations. Furthermore, a four-year ban is disproportionate to these objectives for it goes beyond what is necessary to achieve a doping-free sport.
I submit that the negative effects of such a long penalty overweight all the positive elements that the fight against doping brings. Instead, I suggest a set-back to a two-year period of ineligibility for a first violation of anti-doping rules which can achieve the desired goals with the same intensity as a four-year ban while being at the same time much more athletes' rights friendly.
Moreover, I think that WADA and other anti-doping bodies should focus rather on prevention and education of athletes in anti-doping principles and rules than on repression. I believe that it is better to prevent problems than to deal with their negative effects.