排序方式： 共有42条查询结果，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
兴奋剂是一个众人皆知的敏感话题。它所引发的思考或已经折射出的人文危机不仅反映出人们对奥林匹克运动历史的总结和反省,更应该激起人们对其现在和将来的思考和审视。历史的发展和社会的进步要求我们要与时俱进,运用新眼光看待旧问题能更加深入的了解和分析问题。兴奋剂使用的泛化和反兴奋剂工作的艰难进一步加深了兴奋剂问题的社会关注度。基于兴奋剂的更新加大了反兴奋剂的难度,而兴奋剂的过度使用扭曲了奥林匹克运动的价值,呼吁按照奥运会的运作模式组创一个免于兴奋剂检查的“反奥运会”,以此激起人们对奥林匹克运动发展的重新思考。 相似文献
2.
储陈城 《北京体育大学学报》2018,41(11):42-48
摘要：以体育竞技中的使用兴奋剂行为的刑法规制为研究对象,主要通过文献资料法对域外尤其是德国对兴奋剂的规制演变进行分析,并结合我国的现状,提出具有针对性的对策。研究认为：1）随着兴奋剂使用的泛滥化,国际社会开始出现对体育竞技中使用兴奋剂的行为予以刑事处罚的倾向。2）各国的处罚模式主要有两种,即以欺诈罪来规制使用兴奋剂非法获得经济性利益的行为,以故意伤害罪来保护运动员的身体法益。然而这些传统的规制模式存在零散性、滞后性,且缺乏理论自洽性。3）2015年11月德国制定的《体育反兴奋剂使用法》明确了兴奋剂刑事规制所要保护的法益和目的,体系性地划定了需要刑罚化的兴奋剂使用行为。4）为促使我国未来兴奋剂刑事管控的规范化和体系化,应当明确刑事立法所保护的法益、反兴奋剂刑事立法的目标以及处罚的具体范围。 相似文献
3.
摘要：尽管使用兴奋剂以获得比赛竞争优势的行为,属于诈骗行为的范畴,《世界反兴奋剂条例》却一直受到法学界的质疑,因为其对运动员的处罚主要表现为剥夺运动员一定期限的比赛资格,属于刑事处罚中职业禁止的范畴,但其适用的却是仲裁程序。所以,在当前法律框架下,如何在程序上保护运动员的权利,就成了一个不能回避的问题。从规范分析法和社会关系分析法的角度看,当前惩罚性的兴奋剂处罚对运动员存在着错误追究和不公正仲裁等程序风险,且缺乏相应的司法救济途径。为了解决这些问题,使兴奋剂处罚获得正当性,一则需要在相应的条文中增设运动员的权利,以制约反兴奋剂机构的权力;二则需要建立反兴奋剂基金,确保运动员能获得相应的法律服务;三则要建立运动员工会,以平衡运动员与反兴奋剂组织之间的关系;最后,将惩罚性的处罚与运动员的可责性联系在一起,使兴奋剂处罚迎合比例原则的要求。兴奋剂处罚只有获得正当性,其才能融入到当前的法律体系之中,进而才有可能充分调动社会各方面的力量,形成打击使用兴奋剂行为的合力。 相似文献
4.
To inform anti-doping policy and practice, it is important to understand the complexities of doping. The purpose of this study was to collate and systematically examine the reasoned decisions published by UK Anti-Doping for doping sanctions in rugby union in the UK since the introduction of the 2009 World Anti-Doping Code. Case files were content analysed to extract demographic information and details relating to the anti-doping rule violation (ADRV), including individuals’ explanations for how/why the ADRV occurred. Between 2009 and 2015, 49 rugby union players and one coach from across the UK were sanctioned. Over 50% of the cases involved players under the age of 25, competing at sub-elite levels. Reasons in defence of the ADRV focused on functional use and lifestyle factors rather than performance enhancement. An a priori assessment of the “need”, “risk” and “consequence” of using a substance was not commonplace; further strengthening calls for increasing the reach of anti-doping education. The findings also deconstruct the view that “doped” athletes are the same. Consequently, deepening understanding of the social and cultural conditions that encourage doping remains a priority. 相似文献
5.
张俊雅 《武汉体育学院学报》2022,56(4):35-41
随着信息技术的发展,个人信息保护已成为十分重要的话题。世界反兴奋剂组织为了保障运动员等反兴奋剂活动参与者的个人信息权制定了《保护隐私和个人信息国际标准》。该标准从信息主体权利赋予,反兴奋剂组织义务承担两个方面对反兴奋剂活动中的个人信息进行保护。对该规则的考察是运动员等信息主体在反兴奋剂活动中维护其个人信息权利的基础,也是保障反兴奋剂组织涉个人信息工作合规开展的前提条件。同时,该标准仍存在运动员个人信息处理过度、个人信息安全保障欠缺、个人信息权利行使困难和信息处理者责任后果缺失的问题,相关规定有向反兴奋剂组织过度倾斜之嫌。应当对该标准的不足之处进行完善,以期实现运动员与反兴奋剂组织间的利益平衡。 相似文献
6.
为打击兴奋剂滥用行为,维护体育赛事的公平竞争,各国政府与各体育组织共同建立了世界反兴奋剂体系,并形成了一系列兴奋剂检查规则。然而,目前的世界反兴奋剂体系存在严格运动员责任与淡化运动员权利的矛盾。尽管2021版《WADC条例》已体现出保护运动员权利的趋势,但仍存在缺陷。兴奋剂检查权力滥用可能会引致程序失范,最终导致运动员参赛权、形象权等正当权利遭到减损。因此,在实施严格的兴奋剂检查的同时,也需保障运动员的正当权利。 相似文献
7.
临时停赛是反兴奋剂工作中较为常见的管理手段，依托反兴奋剂规则体系的建设，临时停赛规则整体上体现出了一致性和灵活性兼备的特点。但由于《世界反兴奋剂条例》临时停赛条款关键内容的缺失，以及各反兴奋剂组织的反兴奋剂规则补充规定的不完善，临时停赛规则的一致性和灵活性相结合的优势未能获得充分发挥，不利于运动员权利的保护，也影响了国际反兴奋剂工作公平协调地进行。完善临时停赛规则应当强调《世界反兴奋剂条例》与各体育组织、反兴奋剂机构的反兴奋剂规则之间的“分工”，并重点关注临时停赛的适用标准、停止条件、违规后果、时长标准和赔偿规则等问题。我国的临时停赛规则存在实践适用较少、认定标准简单的问题，应当借鉴国际经验进一步完善相关规定，助力我国反兴奋剂事业的发展。 相似文献
8.
AbstractOn April 1, 2018, the new standards of compliance to the code of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) came into force. The new standards impact all sports. An important amendment has been made to an article of the existing code ‘Additional Roles and Responsibility of the Parties’. Now, all international federations and the unions in agreement with WADA are obliged to reject applications for holding all sporting events from countries that do not comply with the WADA code. By then, Russian elite sport remained in isolation because the Russian Anti-Doping Agency (RUSADA) had no license from WADA until a compromise agreement allowed Russia back into international sports in September 2018. The probability of obtaining permanent return to international sport was extremely low. In order to obtain the license, Russian sport authorities were asked to agree with the reports of Professor McLaren and to admit the existence of doping support in the country at the state level, which seemed improbable. In Russia, although the new standards of the World Anti-Doping Agency code have not caused special concerns it directly impact Russian elite sport. Unless certain conditions were met by 2019, there was a high probability that Russia would not be able to attend large international competitions in the near future, including the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. The situation dictates the choice of the new strategy of development for Russian sport and new model for the fight against doping, which can be not dependent on WADA. To date, there have been no real checks on WADA’s authority other than occasional decisions in the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Academics who are critical of WADA’s functions often find themselves marginalized when the purported global doping “crisis” should bring “all hands on deck” to provide a humanistic and scientific approach that is best for athletes past, present and future. The functions of WADA in investigating, charging and punishing athletes do not contribute to sustainable development of sport and the sports industry around the world, and create unipolar environment of influence on sports development. Therefore, in this article, we describe some alternative forms and new order of regulation of the anti-doping relations in sport. 相似文献
9.
黄青 《内江师范学院学报》2007,22(4):118-121
兴奋剂的使用在现代体育比赛中日益泛滥,并困扰着竞技体育的健康发展.该本文通过对较多的文献资料研究,总结了使用兴奋剂的原因及特点,进一步探讨了世界体坛反兴奋剂运动的新趋势和新举措,期望能为我国体坛反兴奋剂提供借鉴和参考. 相似文献
10.
我国反兴奋剂处罚机制重视实体处罚而忽视程序救济之特点长期为学术界和体育界所诟病。人权保护原则、惩罚与救济相适应原则、程序正义原则为反兴奋剂处罚之救济提供了坚实的法理依据。借鉴域外相关经验，仲裁并辅之司法介入的方式对反兴奋剂处罚予以救济是实现反兴奋剂有效管理的制度闭环，考虑到目前国际形势和在我国现实国情，应将运动员在反兴奋剂处罚方面的程序性权利作为立法根基，同时建立行业内仲裁和适当司法介入机制为反兴奋剂处罚提供救济。 相似文献