Analytical Finding. If the Athlete or other Person does so, the burden shifts to [NADO] to prove to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel that the departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding.] 3.2.2 3.2.3 Departures from any other International Standard for Laboratories or other anti-doping rule or policy set forth in the Code or these Anti-Doping Rules which did not cause an Adverse Analytical Finding or other anti-doping rule violation shall not invalidate such evidence or results. If the Athlete or other Person establishes that a departure from another International Standard or other anti-doping rule or policy which could reasonably have caused thean anti-doping rule violation based on an Adverse Analytical Finding or other anti-doping rule violation occurred, then [NADO] shall have the burden to establish that such a departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding or the factual basis for the anti-doping rule violation. 3.2.3 3.2.4 The facts established by a decision of a court or professional disciplinary tribunal of competent jurisdiction which is not the subject of a pending appeal shall be irrebuttable evidence against the Athlete or other Person to whom the decision pertained of those facts unless the Athlete or other Person establishes that the decision violated principles of natural justice. 3.2.4 3.2.5 The hearing panel in a hearing on an anti-doping rule violation may draw an inference adverse to the Athlete or other Person who is asserted to have committed an anti-doping rule violation based on the Athlete’s or other Person’s refusal, after a request made in a reasonable time in advance of the hearing, to appear at the hearing (either in person or telephonically as directed by the hearing panel) and to answer questions either from the hearing panel or from the Anti-Doping Organization asserting the anti-doping rule violation[NADO]. [Comment to Article 3.2.4: Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances has been recognized in numerous CAS decisions.] ARTICLE 4 THE PROHIBITED LIST 4.1 Incorporation of the Prohibited List These Anti-Doping Rules incorporate the Prohibited List which is published and revised by WADA as described in Article 4.1 of the Code. [NADO] will make the current Prohibited List available to each National Federation, and each National Federation shall ensure that the current Prohibited List is available to its members and constituents.
Analytical Finding. If the Athlete or other Person does so, the burden shifts to [NADO] to prove to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel that the departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding.] 3.2.2 3.2.3 Departures from any other International Standard for Laboratories or other anti-doping rule or policy set forth in the Code or these Anti-Doping Rules which did not cause an Adverse Analytical Finding or other anti-doping rule violation shall not invalidate such evidence or results. If the Athlete or other Person establishes that a departure from another International Standard or other anti-doping rule or policy which could reasonably have caused thean anti-doping rule violation based on an Adverse Analytical Finding or other anti-doping rule violation occurred, then [NADO] shall have the burden to establish that such a departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding or the factual basis for the anti-doping rule violation. 3.2.3 3.2.4 The facts established by a decision of a court or professional disciplinary tribunal of competent jurisdiction which is not the subject of a pending appeal shall be irrebuttable evidence against the Athlete or other Person to whom the decision pertained of those facts unless the Athlete or other Person establishes that the decision violated principles of natural justice. 3.2.4 3.2.5 The hearing panel in a hearing on an anti-doping rule violation may draw an inference adverse to the Athlete or other Person who is asserted to have committed an anti-doping rule violation based on the Athlete’s or other Person’s refusal, after a request made in a reasonable time in advance of the hearing, to appear at the hearing (either in person or telephonically as directed by the hearing panel) and to answer questions either from the hearing panel or from the Anti-Doping Organization asserting the anti-doping rule violation[NADO]. [Comment to Article 3.2.4: Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances has been recognized in numerous CAS decisions.] ARTICLE 4 THE PROHIBITED LIST 4.1 Incorporation of the Prohibited List These Anti-Doping Rules incorporate the Prohibited List which is published and revised by WADA as described in Article 4.1 of the Code. [NADO] will make the current Prohibited List available to each National Federation, and each National Federation shall ensure that the current Prohibited List is available to its members and constituents.
WADA-2015-NADO-Model-Rules-v3.0-redlined-to-NADO-Model-Rules-2012-EN.docx