Freedom of keeping and evaluation of evidence by the jurisdictional bodies of Russian sports organizations

The subject. The All-Russian sports federations, professional leagues, and the Russian AntiDoping Agency (RUSADA) are legally endowed with the rights to create jurisdictional bodies for the mandatory pre-trial settlement of disputes in sports arising between subjects of professional sports and high-performance sports. The listed sports organizations independently develop and approve the procedural rules used in the procedures for the settlement of these disputes, including setting certain standards of proof. The latter can both be literally reflected in the provisions of the regulations of sports organizations without special detail, and expressed in norms that oblige the jurisdictional body to a certain analysis of evidence and justification based on such a decision. The purpose of the study. To analyze the regulations of the all-Russian sports federations, professional leagues, and RUSADA, and highlight several key features of securing the freedom of collection and evaluation of evidence for jurisdictional bodies, both provided by the parties and received at the initiative of such bodies. Methodology. The regulatory norms of the Russian Football Union were used as a representative legal experience, as methods of analysis and comparison are used. The main results of research and the field of their application. Having analyzed the regulations of the all-Russian sports federations, professional leagues, and RUSADA, the authors identified many key features of securing the freedom of collection and evaluation of evidence for jurisdictional bodies, both provided by the parties and received at the initiative of such bodies. Conclusions. The specifics of regulation by sports organizations and the freedom to collect and evaluate evidence by jurisdictional organizations allow us to see their rule-making approaches regarding the use of standards of proof.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Law Enforcement Review
Published
2025-03-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.52468/2542-1514.2025.9(1).74-83
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Doping in Sports
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.20
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Freedom of keeping and evaluation of evidence by the jurisdictional bodies of Russian sports organizations

Evgenia G. Vetrova, I. A. Vasilyev
1 citations
Law Enforcement Review
Doping in Sports
4.20
article

Freedom of keeping and evaluation of evidence by the jurisdictional bodies of Russian sports organizations

Evgenia G. Vetrova, I. A. Vasilyev
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The subject. The All-Russian sports federations, professional leagues, and the Russian AntiDoping Agency (RUSADA) are legally endowed with the rights to create jurisdictional bodies for the mandatory pre-trial settlement of disputes in sports arising between subjects of professional sports and high-performance sports. The listed sports organizations independently develop and approve the procedural rules used in the procedures for the settlement of these disputes, including setting certain standards of proof. The latter can both be literally reflected in the provisions of the regulations of sports organizations without special detail, and expressed in norms that oblige the jurisdictional body to a certain analysis of evidence and justification based on such a decision. The purpose of the study. To analyze the regulations of the all-Russian sports federations, professional leagues, and RUSADA, and highlight several key features of securing the freedom of collection and evaluation of evidence for jurisdictional bodies, both provided by the parties and received at the initiative of such bodies. Methodology. The regulatory norms of the Russian Football Union were used as a representative legal experience, as methods of analysis and comparison are used. The main results of research and the field of their application. Having analyzed the regulations of the all-Russian sports federations, professional leagues, and RUSADA, the authors identified many key features of securing the freedom of collection and evaluation of evidence for jurisdictional bodies, both provided by the parties and received at the initiative of such bodies. Conclusions. The specifics of regulation by sports organizations and the freedom to collect and evaluate evidence by jurisdictional organizations allow us to see their rule-making approaches regarding the use of standards of proof.

Law Enforcement ReviewVol. 9(1)
St Petersburg University (RU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Doping in Sports
4.20
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.