论兴奋剂处罚的归责原则与WADC目的的冲突及协调

发布时间：2018-01-28 08:16

  本文关键词： 体育法学 世界反兴奋剂条例 严格责任 过失 故意 诈骗　出处：《武汉体育学院学报》2017年03期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：《世界反兴奋剂条例》对兴奋剂处罚规定了三个归责原则:兴奋剂违规适用严格责任,一般性处罚适用过失责任,加重处罚适用故意责任。由于心理要素事实具有模糊性,且证据无法记述其存在,故在实践中很难将三者区分,以心理要素作为处罚的条件,极易造成兴奋剂处罚权的失控,危及运动员的权利,使兴奋剂处罚与反兴奋剂运动的目的发生冲突。为了协调两者的关系,有效地控制兴奋剂的使用,条例应当以惩罚性赔偿制度为理论基础,借鉴美国橄榄球联盟的药品政策,一则加强对兴奋剂的日常监管,二则降低处罚,三则以刑事处罚做补充。这种药品政策不仅能确保兴奋剂处罚的正当性和打击使用兴奋剂行为的有效性,而且,还符合我国的国情,有利于维护我国体育在国际上的正面形象。
[Abstract]:The World Anti-Doping regulations stipulate three imputation principles for doping punishment: strict liability for doping violation and negligence liability for general punishment. Due to the ambiguity of the fact of psychological elements and the fact that the evidence can not record their existence, it is difficult to distinguish the three in practice and take psychological elements as the condition of punishment. It is easy to cause out of control of the right to punish doping, endanger the rights of athletes, make the purpose of doping punishment and anti-doping campaign conflict. In order to coordinate the relationship between the two, effectively control the use of stimulants. The regulations should be based on the punitive damages system and draw lessons from the drug policy of the American Rugby League. One is to strengthen the daily supervision of doping and the other is to reduce the penalty. This drug policy not only ensures the legitimacy of doping punishment and the effectiveness of cracking down on the use of doping, but also conforms to the national conditions of our country. It is beneficial to maintain the positive image of Chinese sports in the world.
【作者单位】： 中国石油大学(华东)文学院法律系;
【基金】：青岛市社科规划项目“最后的手段原则规则化视野下的欺诈问题研究”(QDSKL1601041)
【分类号】：D99;G803
【正文快照】： 2009年的《世界反兴奋剂条例》(以下简称为《条例》或WADC)生效后,虽然得到了很多国家、世界组织甚至是一些运动员的拥护,但其同时也受到了很多人,特别是法律界的质疑。欧盟为此曾成立了一个专门的工作小组,就《条例》与欧洲法的冲突问题,提供专家意见。该小组先后提交了两份，

本文编号：1470238