2021 Code Review
The current version of World Anti-Doping Code is being reviewed. The revised Code will come into force in January 2021. Also under review are a number of International Standards.
After consulting with New Zealand sporting organisations, DFSNZ has made several submissions as part of the Code review process. Particularly topical are our submissions on introducing a new definition for a recreational athlete. References to these can be found in all our submissions on the Code.
First consultation phase
Excerpt: “While DFSNZ strongly believes that all athletes ought to be held to the same standard of integrity, it considers that it would be beneficial for WADA to re-examine the current sanction regime to consider whether it appropriately accounts for Athletes competing at a social or casual level whose breaches are comparatively minor.
We recognise that it may be difficult to differentiate between athletes who compete on a social or casual basis and athletes who aspire to higher honours (and seek an unfair advantage to get there). Further research may be required in this area to understand the reasons for taking prohibited substances in such circumstances.”
Document: First consulation phase submissions
Second consultation phase
DFSNZ strongly supports the ability for a more flexible sanctions regime to be available for lower level athletes.
Excerpt: “DFSNZ suggests a more workable solution that achieves the desired result would be, that an athlete who has represented his/her country, at any level, is subject to the full sanction regime within the Code. The sanction for any other athlete is at the discretion of the hearing body, having regard to all relevant circumstances. It shall not be greater than the sanction that would be applicable, in the same circumstances, to an athlete who has represented his/her country.
A comment to this rule should state that the relevant circumstances include (but are not limited to) the sanction applicable to an athlete who has represented his/her country, the level at which the athlete participates, the nature of the violation, the age of the athlete and the level of anti-doping education the athlete has received.”
Third consultation phase
Provide greater flexibility for education content to be tailored to the specific audience (eg youth)
DFSNZ opposes requirement for host country to pay financial contribution promptly, or risk losing accreditation
Article 10.6 Reduction of the Period of Ineligibility based on No Significant Fault or Negligence