The Council of State confirms the option for the AFLD Sanctions Commission to reduce the duration of a sanction taken against an athlete for the use of unspecified substances when the circumstances of the case justify it with regard to the principle of proportionality .
The judgment of February 7, 2022, n°452029
Dans cet judgment delivered on February 7, 2022, the Council of State considered that the circumstances of an athlete using unspecified substances without demonstrating that he had no intention of committing the breach in question could not limit the ability, for the Commission sanctions from the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD), to reduce the duration of his suspension.
This possibility of lowering the sanction responds to the requirements of necessity and proportionality.
This ruling follows the filing of a summary request and an additional brief by the president of the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD), recorded on April 26 and July 26, 2021, against a decision of the AFLD Sanctions Commission of February 15, 2021.
The principles of necessity and proportionality
The provisions of the Sports Code relating to the reduction of sanctions
Article L. 232-23-3-10 of the Sports Code takes up these principles by allowing suspension reduction imposed on an athlete sanctioned for doping when the alternatively listed conditions are met.
Article L. 232-23-3-10 of the Sports Code provides:
"II.-The duration of the suspension measures provided for in Articles L. 232-23-3-3 to L. 232-23-3-9 may be reduced under the following conditions, which are mutually exclusive:
1° Where the violation involves a Specified Substance or Method other than a Substance of Abuse, or where the Prohibited Substance detected, other than a Substance of Abuse, is from a Contaminated Product, and that the interested party can establish that he has no significant fault or negligence, the sanction is at least a warning and at most a suspension for a period of two years, depending on the degree of his fault;2° When the violation involving a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method, other than a Substance of Abuse, is committed by a Protected Person or Recreational Level Athlete, and the party can establish no significant fault or negligence, the sanction is at least a warning and at most a suspension for a period of two years, depending on the degree of his fault;[...]The duration of the suspension measures provided for in Articles L. 232-23-3-3 to L. 232-23-3-9 may be reduced by a specially reasoned decision when the particular circumstances of the case justify it with regard to the principle of proportionality."
The ability to reduce the AFLD Sanctions Committee
The Council of State states that:
« [...] the fact that the athlete, who has made use of unspecified substances, does not demonstrate that he did not intend to commit the breach in question, and cannot therefore benefit from the reduction from four to two years of the duration of the sanction of prohibition incurred, provided for by the provisions of article L. 232-23-3-3 of the sports code, cannot limit the ability of the AFLD Sanctions Committee, in the event that it applies article L. 232-23-3-10 of the sports code, to reduce the duration of the prohibition measure when the particular circumstances of the case justify it with regard to the principle of proportionality ».
Thus, even if the sportsman had not demonstrated that he had not intended to commit an anti-doping rule violation, the AFLD Sanctions Committee may still reduce his suspension on the basis of the principle of proportionality when the circumstances of the case justify it.
On the same theme, see the following articles:
[02.06.2021]
[24.02.2021]
