Pakistan Ju Jitsu Federation

International Belt Wrestling Association
Anti-Doping Rules

PROCEDURE FOR ANTI DOPING TEST AND REGULATIONS

INTRODUCTION:

Preface:

The International Belt Wrestling Association (IBWA) condemns competitors’ use of prohibited substances and prohibited methods for reasons of fairness and health. The fact is that use of such prohibited substances and prohibited methods creates risks to health, some of them immediate and others for the longer term. Any competitor must disclose at registration with the IBWA any positive test result for which he has been sanctioned by any National, Regional, Continental/Union or International Sports Organization, the IOC or any Governments or Governments Agencies.
The use of performance enhancing drugs (“dope”) is strictly forbidden. A competitor who does not observe the regulations of the International Belt Wrestling Association (IBWA) with respect to dope tests, or who is found to have been guilty of using such drugs, is sanctioned, disqualified from a competition and forbidden to participate in the world championships, in the Olympic Games, in continental championships and in all international tournaments (according to the dispositions provided in articles 10.2 and 10.3). Note: In the IBWA Anti-Doping Rules, the masculine gender used in relation to any physical person (for example, names such as member, leader, official, participants, competitor, athlete, judge, referee, personnel, or pronouns such as he, they, them) shall, unless there is a specific provision to the contrary, be understood as including the feminine gender.
At the IBWA G.A held on 10th October 2007 in Ufa-Russia, IBWA accepted the World Anti-Doping Code (the “Code”). These Anti-Doping Rules were adopted and implemented in conformance with IBWA responsibilities under the Code, and are in furtherance of IBWA’s continuing efforts to fight against doping in the sport of wrestling and to prevent it. At the IBWA Board of Directors meeting held on 06/06/2008 in Mariupol-Ukraine, IBWA acknowledge the Olympic Movement Medical Code because it complements and reinforces the World Anti-Doping Code and reflects the general principles recognized in the international codes of medical ethics. The amendments in these rules were incorporated during the board meeting on 06/06/2008.
Anti-Doping Rules, like Competition rules, are sport rules governing the conditions under which sport is played. Athletes and other persons accept these rules as a condition of participation and shall be bound by them. These sport-specific rules and procedures, aimed at enforcing anti-doping principles in a global and harmonized manner, are distinct in nature and, therefore, not intended to be subject to, or limited by any national requirements and legal standards applicable to criminal proceedings or employment matters. When reviewing the facts and the law of a given case, all courts, arbitral tribunals and other adjudicating bodies should be aware of and respect the distinct nature of the anti-doping rules in the Code and the fact that these rules represent the consensus of a broad spectrum of stakeholders around the world with an interest in fair sport.
Note: According to the previous decisions of the IBWA and Congress, the IBWA rules shall be updated systematically in order to comply with the Code applicable to all components of the Olympic Movement.

Fundamental Rationale for the Code and IBWA’s Anti-Doping Rules:
Anti-Doping programs seek to preserve what is intrinsically valuable about sport.This intrinsic value is often referred to as “the spirit of sport”, it is the essence of Olympism; it is how we play true. The spirit of sport is the celebration of the human spirit, body and mind and is characterized by the following values:

• Ethics, fair play and honesty
• Health
• Excellence in performance
• Fund and joy
• Teamwork
• Dedication and commitment
• Respect for rules and laws
• Respect for self and other participants
• Courage
• Community and solidarity

Doping is fundamentally contrary to the spirit of sport.

Scope

These Anti-Doping Rules shall apply to the IBWA, each Union and each National Federation of the IBWA, and each participant in the activities of the IBWA, its Unions or any of its National Federations by virtue of the participant’s membership, accreditation, or participation in the IBWA, its Unions and its National Federations, or their activities or Events.
The National Federation must guarantee that all athletes entered in international competitions, events organized by or under the auspices of the IBWA accept the Rules of the IBWA including these IBWA Anti-Doping Rules compiled in accordance with the World Anti-Doping Code and have personally signed the Appendix 1 consent form, in the actual form approved by the IBWA Executive Committee.
It is the responsibility of each National Federation to ensure that all national-level testing on the National Federation’s Athletes complies with these Anti-Doping Rules. In some cases, Unions themselves, National Federation itself will be conducting the Doping Control described in these Anti-doping Rules. In other countries, many of the Doping Control responsibilities of the National Federation have been delegated or assigned by statute to a National Anti-Doping Organization. In those countries, references in these Anti-Doping Rules to the National Federation shall apply, as applicable, to the National Federation’s National Anti-Doping Organization.
These Anti-Doping Rules shall apply to all Doping Controls over which the IBWA, its Unions and its National Federations have jurisdiction.

ARTICLE 1 
DEFINATION OF DOPING

Doping is defined as the occurrence of one or more of the anti-doping rule violations set forth in Article-2.1 through Article 2.8 of these Anti-Doping Rules.

ARTICLE 2
ANTI-DOPING VIOLATIONS

The following constitute anti-doping rule violations:
Athletes and other Persons shall be responsible for knowing what constitutes an anti-doping rule violation and the substances and methods which have been included on the Prohibited List.
[Comments to Article-2: The purpose of Article-2 is to specify the circumstances and conduct which constitute violations of anti-doping rules. Hearings in doping cases will proceed based on the assertion that one or more of these specific rules has been violated].
2.1: It is each Athlete’s personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters his body. Athletes are responsible for any Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found to be present in their bodily specimens. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence or knowing use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an anti-doping violation under Article-2.1 Comment to Article-2.1.1: For purposes of anti-doping violations involving the presence of a Prohibited Substance (or its Metabolites or Markers), IBWA’s Anti-Doping Rules adopt the rule of strict liability which anti-doping rules. Under the strict liability principle, an Athlete is responsible, and an anti-doping rule violation occurs, whenever a Prohibited Substance is found in an Athlete’s Sample. The violation occurs whether or not the Athlete intentionally or unintentionally used a Prohibited Substance or was negligent or otherwise at fault. If the positive Sample came from an In-Competition test, then the results of that Competition are automatically invalidated (Article 9 – Automatic Disqualification of Individual Results). However, the Athlete then has the possibility to avoid or reduce sanctions if the Athlete can demonstrate that he was not at fault or significant fault (Article 10.5- Elimination or Reduction of Period of Ineligibility Based on Exceptional Circumstances) or in certain circumstances did not intend to enhance his sport performance (Article-10.4 (Elimination or Reduction of the Period of Ineligibility for Specified Substances under Specific Circumstances).

The strict liability rule for the finding of a Prohibited Substance in an Athlete’s Sample, with a possibility that sanctions may be modified based on specified criteria, provides a reasonable balance between effective anti-doping enforcement for the benefit of all “clean” Athletes and fairness in the exceptional circumstance where a Prohibited Substance entered an Athlete’s system through No Fault or Negligence or No Significant Fault or Negligence on the Athlete’s part. It is important to emphasize that while the determination of whether the anti-doping rule has been violated is based on strict liability, the imposition of a fixed period of Ineligibility is not automatic. The strict liability principle set forth in the IBWA Anti-Doping Rules has been consistently upheld in the decisions of CAS.
2.12: Sufficient proof of an anti-doping rule violation under Article 2.1 is established by either of the following: presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in the Athlete’s A Sample where the Athlete waives analysis of the B Sample and the B Sample is not analyzed; or, where the Athlete’s B Sample is analyzed and the analysis of the Athlete’s B Sample confirms the presence of the Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found in the Athlete’s A Sample.
[Comment to Article 2.1.2: The IBWA may in its discretion choose to have the B Sample analyzed even if the Athlete does not request the analysis of the B Sample].
2.1.3:  Excepting those substances for which a quantitative threshold is specifically identified in the Prohibited List, the presence of any quantity of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an Athlete’s Sample shall constitute an anti-doping rule violation.
2.1.4: As an exception to the general rule of Article 2.1, the Prohibited List or International Standards may establish special criteria for the evaluation of Prohibited Substances that can also be produced endogenously.
2.2: Use or Attempted use by an Athlete of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method [ Comment to Article 2.2: As noted in Article 3 (Proof of Doping), it has always been the case that Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method may be established by any reliable means. Unlike the proof required to establish an anti-doping rule violation under Article 2.1, Use or Attempted Use may also be established by other reliable means such as admissions by the Athlete, witness statements, documentary evidence, conclusions drawn from longitudinal profiling, or other analytical information which does not otherwise satisfy all lthe requirements to establish “Presence” of a Prohibited Substance under Article 2.1 For example, Use may be established based upon reliable analytical data from the analysis of an A Sample (without confirmation from an analysis of a B Sample) or from the analysis of a B Sample alone where the IBWA provides a satisfactory explanation for the lack of confirmation in the other Sample].
2.2.1:  It is each Athlete’s personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters his or her body. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence or knowing Use on the Athlete’s part be demonstrated in ;order to establish an anti-doping rule violation for Use of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method.
2.2.2: The success or failure of the Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is not material. It is sufficient that the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method was Used or Attempted to be Use for an anti-doping rule violation to be committed.
[Comment to Article 2.2.2: Demonstrating the “Attempted Use” of a Prohibited Substance requires proof of intent on the Athlete’s part. The fact that intent may be required to prove this particular anti-doping rule violation does not undermine the strict liability principle established for violations of Article 2.1 and violations of Article 2.2 in respect of Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method. An Athlete’s “Use” of a Prohibited Substance constitutes an anti-doping rule violation unless such substance is not prohibited Out-of-competition and the Athlete’s Use takes place Out-of-Competition. (However, the presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Metabolites or Markers) regardless of when that substance might have been administered).
2.3:  Refusing, or failing without compelling justification, to submit to Sample collection after notification as authorized in these Anti-Doping Rules or otherwise evading Sample collection.
[Comment to Article 2.3: Failure or refusal to submit to Sample collection after notification was prohibited in almost all pre-Code anti-doping rules. This Article expands the typical pre-Code rule to include “otherwise evading Sample collection” as prohibited conduct. Thus, for example, it would be an anti-doping rule violation if it were established that an Athlete was hiding from a Doping Control official to evade notification or Testing. A violation of “refusing or failing to submit to Sample collection” may be based on either intentional or negligent conduct of the Athlete, while “evading” Sample collection contemplates intentional conduct by the Athlete].
2.4: Violation of applicable requirements regarding Athlete availability for Out-of-Competition Testing set out in the International Standard for Testing, including failure to file whereabouts information in accordance with Article 11.3 of the International Standard for Testing (a ”Filing Failure”) and failure to be available for Testing at the declared whereabouts in accordance with Article 11.4of the International Standard for Testing (a “Missed Test). Any combination of three Missed Tests and/or Filling Failures committed within an eighteen-month period, as declared by the IBWA or any other Anti-Doping Organization with jurisdiction over an Athlete, shall constitute an anti-doping rule violation.
[Comment to Article 2.4: Separate whereabouts filing failures and missed tests declared under the rules of the IBWA or any other Anti-Doping Organization with authority to declare whereabouts filing failures and missed tests in accordance with the International standard for Testing shall be combined in applying this Article. In appropriate circumstances, missed tests or filing failures may also constitute an anti-doping rule violation under Article 2.3 or Article 2.5].
2.5: Tampering, or attempting to tamper, with any part of Doping Control.[ Comment to Article 2.5: This Article prohibits conduct which subverts the Doping Control process but which would not otherwise be included in the definition of Prohibited Methods. For example, altering identification numbers on a Doping Control form during Testing, breaking the B Bottle at the time of B Sample analysis or providing fraudulent information to the IBWA].
2.6: Possession of Prohibited Substances and Methods.
2.6.1: Possession by an Athlete Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Method or any Prohibited Substance, or Possession by an Athlete Out-of-Competition Testing unless the Athlete establishes that the Possession is pursuant to a therapeutic use exemption (“TUE”) granted in accordance with Article 4.4 (Therapeutic Use or other acceptable justification.                             

2.6.2: Possession by Athlete Support Personnel In-Competition of any Prohibited Method or any Prohibited Substance, or Possession by Athlete Support Personnel Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Method or any Prohibited Substance which is prohibited Out-of-Competition, in connection with an Athlete, Competition or training, unless the Athlete Support Personnel establishes that the Possession is pursuant to a TUE granted to an Athlete in accordance with Article 4.4 (Therapeutic Use) or other acceptable justification.
[Comment to Article 2.6.1 and 2.6.2: Acceptable justification would not include, for example, buying or possessing a Prohibited substance for purposes of giving it to a friend or relative, except under justifiable medical circumstances where that Person had a physician’s prescription, e.g. buying Insulin for a diabetic child].
[Comment to Article 2.6.2: Acceptable justification would include, for example, a team doctor carrying Prohibited Substances for dealing with acute and emergency situations].
2.7: Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking in any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.
2.8: Administration or Attempted administration to any Athlete In-Competition of any Prohibited Method or Prohibited Substance, or administration or Attempted administration to any Athlete Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Method or any Prohibited Substance that is prohibited Out-of-Competition, or assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, covering up or any other type of complicity involving an anti-doping rule violation or any Attempted anti-doping rule violation.
[Comment to Article 2: The Code does not make it an anti-doping rule violation for an Athlete or other Person to work or associate with Athlete Support Personnel who are serving a period of Ineligibility. However, IF may adopt its own specific policy which prohibit such conduct].

ARTICLE 3: 
PROOF OF DOPING
3.1: Burdens and Standards of Proof:
The IBWA, its Unions and its National Federations shall have the burden of establishing that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred. The standard of proof shall be whether the IBWA, its Union or its National Federation has established an anti-doping rule violation to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing body bearing in mind the seriousness of the allegation which is made. This standard of proof in al cases is greater than a mere balance of probability but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Where these Rules place the burden of proof upon the Athlete or other Person alleged to have committed an anti-doping rule violation to rebut a presumption or establish specified facts or circumstances, the standard of proof shall be by a balance of probability, except as provided in Article 10.4 and 10.6, where the Athlete must satisfy a higher burden of proof.
[Comment to Article 3.1: This standard of proof required to be met by IBWA, its Unions or its National Federation is comparable to the standard which is applied in most countries to cases involving professional misconduct. It has also been widely applied by courts and hearing panels in doping cases. See, for example, the CAS decision in N., Y., W., v. FINA, CAS 98/208, 22 December 1998]
3.2: Methods of Establishing Facts and Presumptions Facts related to anti-doping rule violations may be established by any reliable means, including admissions. The following rules of proof shall be applicable in doping cases:
[Comment to Article 3.2: For example, the IBWA its Unions or its National Federation may establish an anti-doping rule violation under Article 2.2 (Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method) based on the Athlete’s admissions, the credible testimony of third Persons, reliable documentary evidence, reliable analytical data from either an A or B Sample as provided in the Comments to Article 2.2, or conclusions drawn from the profile of a series of the Athlete’s blood or urine Samples.].
3.2.1: WADA-accredited laboratories are presumed to have conducted Sample analysis and custodial procedures in accordance with the International Standard for laboratory. The Athlete or other Person may rebut this presumption by establishing that a departure from the International Standard occurred which could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding. If the Athlete or other Person rebuts the preceding presumption by showing that a departure from the International Standard occurred which could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding, then the IBWA, its Union or its National Federation shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding.
[Comment to Article 3.2.1: The burden is on the Athlete or other Person to establish, by a balance of probability, a departure from the International Standard that could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding. If the Athlete or other Person does so,  the burden shifts to the IBWA, its Unions or its National Federation to prove to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel that the departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding].
3.2.2: Departures from any other International Standard or other anti-doping rule or policy which did not cause an Adverse Analytical Finding or other anti-doping rule violation shall not invalidate such 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 the Adverse Analytical Finding or other anti-doping rule violation occurred, then the IBWA or its National Federation 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: 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 who, the decision pertained of those facts unless the Athlete or other Person establishes that the decision violated principles of natural justice.
3.2.4: 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 tribunal) and to answer questions either from the hearing panel or from the Anti-Doping  Organization asserting the anti-doping rule violation.
[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. The IBWA will make the current Prohibited List available to each Union and National Federation, and each Union and National Federation shall ensure that the current Prohibited List is available to its members and constituents.
[Comment to Article 4.1: The Prohibited List will be revised and published on an expedited basis whenever the need arises. However, for the sake of predictability, a new Prohibited List will be published every year whether or not changes have been made. The Prohibited List in force is available on WADA’s website at www.wada-ama.org. The Prohibited List is an integral part of the International Convention against Doping in Sport. WADA will inform the Director-General of UNESCO of any change to the Prohibited List].
4.2: Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods Identified on the Prohibited List.
4.2.1. Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods: Unless provided otherwise in the Prohibited List and/or a revision, the Prohibited List and revisions shall go into effect under these Anti-Doping Rules three months after publication of the Code, the IBWA may request upon the recommendation of its Anti-Doping Commission that WADA expand the Prohibited List for the sport of Belt. The IBWA may also request upon the recommendation of its Anti-doping Commission that WADA include additional substances or methods, which have the potential for abuse in the sport of Belt, in the monitoring program described in Article 4.5 of the Code. As provided in the Code, WADA shall make the final decision on such requests by the IBWA.

[Comment to Article 4.2.1.: There will be one Prohibited List. The substances which are prohibited at all times would include masking agents and those substances which, when Used in training, may have long term performance enhancing effects such as anabolics. All substances and methods on the Prohibited List are prohibited In-Competition. Out-of-Competition Use (Article 2.2) of a substance which is only prohibited In-Competition is not an anti-doping rule violation unless an Adverse Analytical Finding for the substance or its Metabolites is reported for a Sample collected In-Competition (Article 2.1). There will be only one document called the “Prohibited List”. WADA may add additional substances or methods to the Prohibited List for particular sports (e.g. the inclusion of beta-blockers for shooting) but this will also be reflected on the single Prohibited List. A particular sport is not permitted to seek exemption from the basic list of Prohibited Substances (e.g. eliminating anabolics from the Prohibited List for “mind sports”). The premise of this decision is that there are certain basic doping agents which anyone who chooses to call himself an Athlete should not take].
4.2.2: Specified Substances:
For purposes of the application of Article 10 (Sanctions on Individuals), all Prohibited Substances shall be “Specified Substances” except (a) substances in the classes of anabolic agents and hormones; and (b) those stimulants and hormone antagonists and modulators so identified on the Prohibited List. Prohibited Methods shall not be Specified Substances.
4.2.3: New Classes of Prohibited Substances:
In the event WADA expands the Prohibited List by adding a new class of Prohibited Substances in accordance with Article 4.1 of the Code, WADA’s Executive Committee shall determine whether any or all Prohibited Substances within the new class of Prohibited Substances shall be considered Specified Substances under Article 4.2.2.
4.3: Criteria for Including Substances and Methods on the Prohibited List:
As provided in Article 4.3.3. of the Code, WADA’s determination of the Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods that will be included on the Prohibited List and the classification of substances into categories on the Prohibited List is final and shall not be subject to challenge by an Athlete or other Person based on an argument that the substance or method was not a masking agent or did not have the potential to enhance performance, represent a health risk or violate the spirit of sport.
[Comment to Article 4.3: The question of whether a substance meets the criteria in Article 4.3 (Criteria for Including substances and Methods on the Prohibited List) in a particular case cannot be raised as a defense to an anti-doping rule violation. For example, it cannot be argued that the Prohibited Substance detected would not have been performance enhancing in that particular sport. Rather, doping occurs when a substance listed in the class of anabolic agents does not belong in that class].
4.4: Therapeutic Use
4.4.1: Athletes with a documented medical condition requiring the use of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method must first obtain a TUE. The presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers (Article 2.1), Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method (Article 2.2), Possession of Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods (Article 2.6) or administration of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method (Article 2.8) consistent with the provisions of an applicable TUE issued pursuant to the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions shall not be considered an anti-doping rule violation.
4.4.2: Subject to Article 4.4.3, Athletes included by the IBWA in its registered Testing Pool and other Athletes participating in any International Event must obtain a TUE from the IBWA (regardless of whether the Athlete previously has received a TUE at the national level). The application for a TUE must be made as soon as possible (in the case of an athlete in the Registered Testing Pool, this would be when he is first notified of his inclusion I the pool) and in any event (save in emergency situations) no later than 21 days before the Athlete’s participation in the Event.
4.4.3: The only exception to Article 4.4.2 is that, in accordance with Article 7.13 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, Athletes not in the IBWA’s Registered Testing Pool who inhale Glucocorticosteroids and/or formoterol, salbutamol, salmeterol or terbutaline to great asthma or one of its clinical variants do not need a TUE in advance of participating in an International Event unless so specified by the IBWA. Instead, if necessary, any such Athlete may apply for a Retroactive TUE after the Event in accordance with Article 7.13 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions and Article 7.1.3 of these Anti-Doping Rules.
4.4.4: TUE’s granted by the IBWA shall be reported to the Athlete’s National Federation and to WADA. Other Athletes subject to Testing who need to use a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method for therapeutic reasons must obtain a TUE from their National Anti-Doping Organization or other body designated by their National Federation, as required under the rules of the National Anti-Doping Organization/other body. National Federations shall promptly report any such TUE’s to the IBWA and WADA.
4.4.5: The IBWA Executive Committee shall appoint a panel of physicians to consider requests for TUE’s (the “TUE Panel”). Upon the IBWA’s receipt of a TUE request, the Chair of the TUE Panel shall appoint one or more members of the TUE Panel (which may include the Chair) to consider such request. The TUE Panel member (s) so designated shall promptly evaluate such request in accordance with the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions and render a decision on such request, which shall be the final decision of the IBWA.
4.4.6: WADA, at the request of an Athlete or on its own initiation, may review the granting or denial of any TUE by the IBWA. If WADA determines that the granting or denial of a TUE did not comply with the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions in force at the time then WADA may reverse that decision. Decisions on TUE’s are subject to further appeal as provided in Article 13.

ARTICLE:
TESTING
5.1: Authority to Test
All Athletes under the jurisdiction of a National Federation shall be subject to In-Competition Testing by the IBWA and its Unions, the Athlete’s National Federation, and any other Anti-Doping Organization responsible for Tat a Competition or Event in which they participate. All Athletes under the jurisdiction of a National Federation, including Athletes serving a period of ineligibility or a Provisional Suspension, shall also be subject to Out-of-competition Testing at any time or place, with or without advance notice, by the IBWA, its Unions, WADA, the Athlete’s National Federation, the National Anti-Doping Organization of any country where the Athlete is present, the IOC during the Olympic Games, and the IPC during Paralympic Games. Target Testing will be made a priority.
[Comment to Article 5.1: Target Testing is specified because random Testing, or even weighted random Testing, does not ensure that all of the appropriate Athletes will be tested (e.g. world-class Athletes, Athletes whose performances have dramatically improved over a short period of time, Athletes, whose coaches have had other Athletes test positive, etc.). Obviously, Target Testing must not be used for any purposes other than legitimate Doping Control. The Code makes it clear that Athletes have no right to expect that they will be tested only on a random basis. Similarly, it does not impose any reasonable suspicion or probable cause requirement for Target Testing].
5.2: Responsibility for the IBWA Testing:
The IBWA Anti-Doping Commission shall be responsible for drawing up a test distribution plan for Wrestling in accordance with Article 4 of the International Standard for Testing, and for the implementation of that plan, including overseeing all Testing conducted by or on behalf of the IBWA. Testing may be conducted by members of the IBWA Anti-Doping Commission or by other qualified persons so authorized by the IBWA.
5.3: Testing Standards:
Testing conducted by the IBWA, its Unions and its National Federations shall be in substantial conformity with the International Standard for Testing in force at the time of Testing.
5.3.1. Blood (or other non-urine) Samples may be used to detect Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods, for screening procedure purposes, or for longitudinal hematological profiling (“the Passport”). If the Sample is collected for screening only, it will have no consequences for the Athlete other than to identify him for a urine test under these anti-doping rules. In these circumstances, the IBWA may decide at its own discretion which blood parameters are to be measured in the screening Sample and what levels of those parameters will be used to indicate that an Athlete should be selected for a urine test. If for anti-doping purposes in accordance with Article 2.2 of the Code.
5.4: Coordination of Testing:
The IBWA, Unions and National federations shall promptly report completed tests through the WADA clearinghouse to avoid unnecessary duplication in Testing.

5.5: Athlete whereabouts Requirements:
5.5.1: The IBWA shall identify a Registered Testing Pool of those Athletes who are required to comply with the whereabouts requirements of the International Standard for Testing, and shall publish the criteria for Athletes to be included in this Registered Testing Pool as well as a list of the Athletes meeting those criteria for the period in question. The IBWA Shall review and update as necessary its criteria for including Athletes in its Registered Testing Pool, and shall revise the membership of its Registered Testing Pool from time to time as appropriate in accordance with the set criteria. Each Athlete in the Registered Testing Pool (a) shall advise the IBWA of his whereabouts on a quarterly basis, in the manner set out in Article 11.3 of the International Standard for Testing; (b) shall update that information as necessary, in accordance with Article 11.4.2 of the International Standard for Testing, so that it remains accurate and complete at all times; and (c) shall make him available for Testing at such whereabouts, in accordance with Article 11.4 of the International Standard for Testing.
[Comment to Article 5.5.1: The purpose of the IBWA Registered Testing Pool is to identify top-level International Athletes who the IBWA requires to provide whereabouts information to facilitate Out-of-Competition Testing by the IBWA and other Anti-Doping Organization with jurisdiction over the Athletes. The IBWA will identify such Athletes in accordance with the requirements of Articles 4 and 11.2 of the International Standard for Testing].
5.5.2: An Athlete’s failure to advise the IBWA of his whereabouts shall be deemed a Filing Failure for purposes of Article 2.4 where the conditions of Article 11.3.5 of the International Standard for Testing are met.
5.5.3: An Athlete’s failure to be available for Testing at his/her declared whereabouts shall be deemed a Missed Test for purposes of Article 2.4 where the conditions of Article 11.4.3 of the International Standard for Testing are met.
5.5.4: Each National Federation shall also assist its National Anti-Doping Organization in establishing a national level Registered Testing Pool of top level national Athletes to whom the whereabouts requirements of the International Standard for Testing shall also apply. Where those Athletes are also in the IBWA’s Registered Testing Pool, the IBWA and the National Anti-Doping Organization will agree (with the assistance of WADA if required) on which of them will take responsibility for receiving whereabouts filings from the Athlete and sharing it with the other (and with other Anti-Doping Organizations) in accordance with Article 5.5.5.
5.5.5: Whereabouts information provided pursuant to Articles 5.5.1 and 5.5.4 shall be shared with WADA and other Anti-Doping Organizations having jurisdiction to test an Athlete in accordance with Articles 11.7.1 (d) and 11.7.3 (d) of the International Standard for Testing, including the strict condition that it be used only for Doping Control purposes.
5.6.1: An Athlete who has been identified by the IBWA for inclusion in the IBWA’s Registered Testing Pool shall continue to be subject to these Anti-Doping Rules, including the obligation to comply with the whereabouts requirements of the International Standard for Testing unless and until the Athlete gives written notice to the IBWA that he has retired or until he no longer satisfies the criteria for inclusion in the IBWA’s Registered Testing Pool and has been so informed by the IBWA.
5.6.2: An Athlete who has given notice of retirement to the IBWA may not resume competing unless he notifies the IBWA at least six months before he expects to return to competition and makes him available for unannounced Out-of-Competition Testing, including (if requested) complying with the whereabouts requirements of the International Standard for Testing, at any time during the period before actual return to competition.
5.6.3: National Federation/National Anti-Doping Organizations may establish similar requirements for retirement and returning to competition for Athletes in the National Registered Testing Pool.
5.7: Selection of Athletes to be Tested.
5.7.1: At Individual World Championships the anti-doping test check is carried out [under the supervision either of the IBWA Medical Director or of a representative of the IBWA Anti-Doping Commission] for each weight category on three competitors:
- the first one is the championship winner.
- one of the three other medal-winning competitors chosen by lot.
- one of the 5th and 7th placed competitors chosen by lot.
At a team championship or for the World Championships by Team of Nations, the check is carried out on two members of each medal-winning team. The choice of the weight categories is made by lot.

Note: at other International Tournaments organized by or carried out under the aegis of the IBWA this arrangement may be modified according to available resources. Nevertheless where possible this format should be adhered to. It must include at least one competitor in each weight category drawn by lot from the four medalists.
5.7.2: The process of drawing lots in order to determine the competitors to be checked is carried out by a small committee meeting at the initiative of the Physician mandated by the IBWA for the event in question or by the IBWA Sports Director (or his substitute).

This committee consists of :
- by the IBWA Medical Director or by a representative of the IBWA Anti-Doping Commission.
- an official from the event’s Organizing Committee, and a member of the national federation of the host country.
- the host country’s Doping Control Physician.
The practical procedures relating to drawing lots are up either to by the IBWA Medical Director or by a representative of the IBWA Anti Doping Commission. The “draw” is made before the start of the “Final Block” of the competition (Final Block = Finals of Repechages, Final of Tables, third places and finals).
5.7.3: At National Events, each National Federation shall determine the number of Athletes selected for Testing in each Competition and the procedures for selecting the Athletes for Testing.
5.7.4: In addition to the selection procedures set forth in Articles 5.7.1 and 5.7.2 above, the  Anti-Doping Commission at International Events, IBWA Unions at Continental Level and the National Federation at National Events, may also select Athletes or teams for Target Testing so long as such Target Testing is not used for any purpose other than legitimate Doping Control purposes.
5.7.5: Athletes shall be selected for Out-of-Competition Testing by the IBWA Anti Doping Commission, by Unions and by National Federations through a process that substantially complies with the International Standard for Testing in force at the time of selection.
5.8: National Federations and the organizing committees for National Federation Events shall provide access to Independent Observers at Events as directed by the IBWA.

ARTICLE-6 
ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES:
Doping Control Samples collected under these Anti-Doping Rules shall be analyzed in accordance with the following principles:
6.1: Use of Approved Laboratories:
The IBWA, its Unions shall send Doping Control Samples for analysis only to WADA-accredited laboratories or as otherwise approved by WADA. The choice of the WADA-accredited laboratory (or other method approved by WADA) used for the Sample analysis shall be determined exclusively by the IBWA.
[Comment to Article 6.1: Violations of Article 2.1 (Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers) may be established only by Sample analysis performed by a WADA-approved laboratory or another laboratory specifically authorized by WADA. Violations of other Articles may be established using analytical results from other laboratories so long as the results are reliable].
6.2: Purpose of Collection and Analysis of Samples:
Samples shall be analyzed to detect Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods identified on the Prohibited List and other substances as may be directed by WADA pursuant to the Monitoring Program described in Article 4.5 of the Code or to assist the IBWA in profiling relevant parameters in an Athlete’s urine, blood or other matrix, including DNA or genomic profiling, for anti-doping purposes.
[Comment to Article 6.2: For example, relevant profile information could be used to direct Target Testing or to support an anti-doping rule violation proceeding under Article 2.2 (Use of a Prohibited Substance), or both].
6.3: Research on Samples:
No Sample may be used for any purpose other than as described in Article 6.2 without the Athlete’s written consent. Samples used (with the Athlete’s consent) for purposes other than Article 6.2 shall have any means of identification removed such that they cannot be traced back to a particular Athlete.
6.4: Standards for Sample Analysis and Reporting:
Laboratories shall analyze Doping Control Samples and report results in conformity with the International Standard for Laboratory.
6.5: Retesting Samples:
A Sample may be reanalyzed for the purposes described in Article 6.2 at any time exclusively at the direction of the IBWA or WADA. The circumstances and conditions for retesting Samples shall conform with the requirements of the International Standard for Laboratories.
[Comment to Article 6.5: Although this Article is new, Anti-Doping Organizations have always had the authority to reanalyze Samples. The International Standard for Laboratories or a new technical document which is made a part of the International Standard will harmonize the protocol for such retesting].

ARTICLE 7 
RESULTS MANAGEMENT:
7.1: Results Management for Tests Initiated the IBWA Results management for Tests initiated by the IBWA, its Unions (including Tests performed by WADA pursuant to agreement with the IBWA) shall proceed as set forth below:
7.1.1: The results from all analyses must be sent to the IBWA, it’s Unions (when concerned) in encoded form, in a report signed by an authorized representative of the laboratory. All communication must be conducted in confidentiality and in conformity with ADAMS a database management tool developed by WADA (whenever available). ADAMS is not applicable by a way that the results of the analyses are confidential.
7.1.2: Upon receipt of an A Sample Adverse Analytical Finding, the IBWA Anti-Doping Administrator shall conduct a review to determine whether; (a) the Adverse Analytical Finding is consistent with an applicable TUE, or (b) there is any apparent departure from the International Standard for Testing or International Standard for Laboratories that caused the Adverse Analytical Finding.
7.1.2.1: The IBWA Executive Committee shall appoint an Independent Doping Review Panel consisting of a Chair and 2 other members with experience in anti-doping. All members of the panel shall be otherwise independent from the IBWA. Each panel member shall serve a term of four years. In each case the Chair of the panel shall appoint 1 or more members of the panel (which may include the Chair) to conduct the review discussed in Articles 7.1.2 and 7.1.8 and to review any other potential violations of these Anti-Doping Rules as may be requested by the IBWA.
7.1.3: In the following circumstances:
(a) The Adverse Analytical Finding is for a Glucocorticosteroid, formoterol, salbutamol, salmeterol or terbutaline; and
(b) The Sample in question was provided by an Athlete who is not in the IBWA’s Registered Testling Pool, during his participation in an International Event for which (in accordance with Article 7.13 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions and Article 4.4.3 of these Anti-Doping Rules of the IBWA does not require a TUE for asthma medication in advance; then, before the matter is referred to the IBWA Independent Review Panel under Article 7.1, the Athlete shall be given an opportunity to apply to the TUE Committee for a Retroactive TUE in accordance with Article 7.13 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions. The result of that application shall be forwarded to the IBWA Independent Review Panel for consideration in its review of the Adverse Analytical Finding under Article 7.1.2.
7.1.4: If the initial review of an Adverse Analytical Finding under Article 7.1.2 does not reveal an applicable TUE, or departure from the International Standard for Testing or the International Standard for Laboratories that caused the Adverse Analytical Finding, the IBWA shall promptly notify the Athlete of : (a) the Adverse Analytical Finding; (b) the anti-doping rule violated; (c) the Athlete’s right to promptly request the analysis of the B Sample or, failing such request, that the B Sample analysis may be deemed waived; (d) the scheduled date, time and place for the B sample analysis (which shall be within the time period specified in the International Standard for Laboratories) if the Athlete or the IBWA chooses to request an analysis of the B Sample; (e) the opportunity for the Athlete and/or the Athlete’s representative to attend the B Sample opening and analysis at the scheduled date, time and place if such analysis is requested; and (f) the Athlete’s right to request copies of the A and B Sample laboratory documentation package which includes information as required by the International Standard for Laboratories. The IBWA shall also notify the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization and WADA. If the IBWA decides not to bring forward the Adverse Analytical Finding as an anti-doping rule violation, it shall so notify the Athlete, the Athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organization and WADA.
7.1.5: Where requested by the Athlete or the IBWA, arrangements shall be made for Testing the B Sample within the time period specified in the International Standard for Testing. An Athlete may accept the A Sample analytical results by waiving the requirement for B Sample analysis. The IBWA may nonetheless elect to proceed with the B Sample analysis.
7.1.6: the Athlete and/or his representative shall be allowed to be present at the analysis of the B Sample within the time period specified in the International Standard for Laboratories. Also a representative of the Athlete’s National Federation as well as a representative of the IBWA shall be allowed to be present.
7.1.7:  If the B Sample proves negative, then (unless the IBWA takes the case forward as an anti-doping rule violation under Article 2.2) the entire test shall be considered negative and the Athlete, his National Federation, and the IBWA shall be so informed.
7.1.8: If a Prohibited Substance or the Use of a Prohibited Method is identified, the findings shall be reported to the Athlete, his National Federation, the IBWA, and to WADA.
7.1.9: For apparent anti-doping rule violations that do not involve Adverse Analytical findings, the IBWA shall conduct any necessary follow-up investigation and, at such time as it is satisfied that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred, it shall then promptly notify the Athlete of the anti-doping rule which appears to have been violated, and the basis of the violation.
7.2: Results Management for Atypical Findings.
7.2.1: As provided in the International Standards, in certain circumstances laboratories are directed to report the presence of Prohibited Substances that may also be produced endogenously as Atypical Findings that should be investigated further.
7.2.2: If a laboratory reports an Atypical Finding in respect of a Sample collected from an Athlete by or on behalf of the IBWA, the IBWA Anti-Doping Administrator shall conduct a review to determine whether; (a) the Atypical Finding is consistent with an applicable TUE that has been granted as provided in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, or (b) there is any apparent departure from the International Standard for testing or International Standard for Laboratories that caused the Atypical Analytical Finding.
7.2.3: If the initial review of an Atypical Finding under Article 7.2.2 reveals an applicable TUE or departure from the International Standard for Testing or the International Standard for Laboratories that caused the Atypical Finding, the entire test shall be considered negative.
7.2.4: If the initial review of an Atypical Finding under Article 7.2.2 does not reveal an applicable TUE or departure from the International Standard for Testing or the International Standard for Laboratories that caused the Atypical Finding, the IBWA shall conduct the follow-up investigation required by the International Standards. If, once that investigation is completed, it is concluded that the Atypical Finding should be considered an Adverse Analytical Finding, the IBWA shall pursue the matter in accordance with Article 7.1.3.
7.2.5: The IBWA will not provide notice of an Atypical Finding until it has completed its investigation and has decided whether it will bring the Atypical Finding forward as an Adverse Analytical Finding unless one of the following circumstances exists:
(a) If the IBWA determines the B Sample should be analyzed prior to the conclusion of its follow-up investigation, it may conduct the B Sample analysis after notifying the Athlete, with such notice to include a description of the Atypical Finding and the information described in Article 7.1.3. (c) to (f).
(b) If the IBWA receives a request, either from a Major Event Organization shortly before one of its International Events or from a sports organization responsible for meeting an imminent deadline for selecting team members for an International Event, to disclose whether any Athlete identified on a list provided but the Major Event Organization or sports organization has a pending Atypical Finding, the IBWA shall so identify any such Athlete after first providing notice of the Atypical Finding to the Athlete.
7.3: Results Management for Tests Initiated During Other International Events Results management and the conduct of hearings from a test by the International Olympic Committee, the International Paralympic Committee, or a Major Event Organization, shall be managed, as far as sanctions beyond Disqualification from the Event or the results of the Event, by the IBWA.
7.4: Results Management for Tests initiated by the IBWA, its Unions or by National Federations Results management conducted by the IBWA, its Unions or by National Federations shall be consistent with the general principles for effective and fair results management which underlie the detailed provisions set forth in Article 7. Results of all Doping Controls shall be reported to the IBWA within 14 days of the conclusion of the Union’s or National Federation’s results management process. Any apparent anti-doping rule violation by an Athlete who is a member of that National Federation belonging to the Union shall be promptly referred to an appropriate hearing panel established pursuant to the rules of the National Federation or national law. Apparent anti-doping rule violations by Athletes who are members of a National Federation belonging to another Union shall be referred to the concerned Union to which this Athlete’s National Federation belongs for hearing.
7.5: Results Management for Whereabouts Violations.
7.5.1: Results management in respect of an apparent Filing Failure by an Article in the IBWA’s Registered Testing Pool shall be conducted by the IBWA in accordance with Article 11.6.2 of the International Standard for Testing (unless it has been agreed in accordance with Article 5.5.4 that the National Federation or National Anti-Doping Organization shall take such responsibility).
7.5.2: Results management in respect of an apparent Missed Test by an Athlete in the IBWA’s Registered testing Pool as a result of an attempt to test the Athlete by or on behalf of the IBWA shall be conducted by the IBWA in accordance with Article 11.6.3 of the International Standard for Testing. Results management in respect of an apparent Missed Test by such Athlete as a result of an attempt to test the Athlete by or on behalf of another Anti-Doping Organization shall be conducted by that other Anti-Doping Organization in accordance with Article 11.7.6 (c) of the International Standard for Testing.
7.5.3: Where, in any eighteen-month period, an Athlete in the IBWA’s Registered Testing Pool is declared to have three Filing Failures, or three Missed Tests, or any combination of Filing Failures or Missed Tests adding up to three in total, whether under these Anti-Doping Rules or under the rules of any other Anti-Doping Organization, the IBWA shall bring them forward as an apparent anti-doping rule violation.
7.6 Provisional Suspensions
7.6.1 If analysis of an A Sample has resulted in an Advance Analytical Finding for a Prohibited Substance that is not a Specified Substance, and a review in Accordance with Article 7.1.2 does not reveal an applicable TUE or departure from the International Standard for Testing or the International Standard for Laboratories that caused the adverse Analytical Finding, the IBWA shall provisionally suspend the athlete pending the hearing panel’s determination of whether he has committed an anti-doping rule violation.
7.6.2 In any case not covered by Art.7.6.1 where the IBWA decides to take the matter forward as an apparent anti-doping rule violation in accordance with the IBWA anti doping administrator, may provisionally suspend the athlete pending the hearing panel’s determination of whether he has committed an anti-doping rule violation.
7.6.3: Where a provisional suspension is imposed, whether pursuant to article 7.6.1 or article 7.6.2, the athlete shall be given either(a) an opportunity for a provisional hearing before imposition of the provisional suspension; or(b) an opportunity for an expedited hearing in accordance with article 8(right to a fair hearing) on a timely basis after imposition of a provisional suspension. National Federations shall impose provisional suspensions in accordance with the principles set forth in this article 7.6
7.6.4: If a provisional suspension is imposed based on an adverse analytical finding in respect of an A sample, and any subsequent analysis of the B sample analysis does not confirm the A Sample analysis, then the Athlete shall not be subject to any further provisional suspension on account of a violation of article 2.1 of the code(presence of a Prohibited substance or its Metabolites or markers).In circumstances where the athlete ( or the athlete’s team as may be provided in the rules of the applicable IF) has been removed from a competition based on a violation of article 2.1 and the subsequent B sample analysis does not confirm the A sample finding, if, without otherwise affecting the competition, it is still possible for the athlete or team to be reinserted, the athlete or team may continue to take part in the competition.
(Comment to article 7.6: Before a provisional suspension can be unilaterally imposed by an anti-doping organization, the internal review specified in the code must first be completed. In addition, a signatory imposing a provisional suspension is required to give the athlete an opportunity for a provisional hearing either before or promptly after the imposition of the provisional suspension, or, an expedited final hearing under article 8 promptly after the imposition of the provisional suspension. The athlete has a right to appeal under article 13.2.
In the rare circumstance where the b sample analysis does not confirm the a sample finding, the athlete  who had been provisionally suspended will be allowed, where circumstances permit, to participate in subsequent competitions during the event. Similarly, depending upon the relevant rules of the international Federation in a  team sport, if the team is still in competition, the athlete may be able to take part in future competitions. Athletes shall receive the credit for the provisional suspension against any period of ineligibility which is ultimately imposed as provided in Article 10.9.3)
7.7 Requirement from Sport:
If an athlete or other person retires while a results management process is underway, the IBWA retains jurisdiction to complete its results management process. If an athlete or other person retires before any management process has begun and the IBWA would have had results management jurisdiction over the athlete or other person at the time the athlete or other person committed an anti-doping rule violation, the IBWA has jurisdiction to conduct results management.
(Comment to article 7.7: conduct by an athlete or other person before the athlete or other person was subject to the jurisdiction of any anti-doping organization would not constitute an anti –doping rule violation but could be a legitimate basis for denying the athlete or other person membership in a sports organization).

ARTICLE 8 :
RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING
8.1 Hearing arising out of IBWA testing or tests at International Events or World Championship.
8.1.1 The IF executive shall appoint a standing panel consisting of the chair and four other experts with experience in anti-doping( IBWA Doping Hearing Panel “DHP”). The chair shall be a Lawyer. Each panel member shall be otherwise independent of the IBWA. Each panel member shall serve a term of four years.
8.1.2 When it appears, following the results management process described in article 7, that these anti –doping rules have been violated  in connection with IBWA testing or testing at an International event then the case shall be assigned to the IBWA Doping Hearing Panel for adjudication.
8.1.3 The Chair of the IBWA- DHP shall appoint three members from the panel (which may include the chair) to hear each case. At least one appointed member shall be Lawyer. The appointed members shall have had no prior involvement with the case and shall not have the same nationality as the athlete or other person alleged to have violated these anti –doping rules.
8.1.4 Hearings pursuant to this article shall be completed expeditiously following the completion of the results management process described in article 7.Hearing held in connection with Events may be conducted on an expedited basis.
8.1.5 The national Federation of the athlete or other person alleged to have violated these anti-doping rules may attend the hearing as an observer.
8.1.6  IBWA shall keep WADA fully apprised as to the status  of pending cases and the result of all hearings.
8.1.7 An athlete or other person may forego a hearing by acknowledging the anti- doping rule violation and accepting consequences consistent with article 9 and 10 as proposed by the IBWA. The right to a hearing may be waived either expressly or by the athlete’s or other person’s failure to challenge the IBWA’s assertion that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred within four weeks. Where no hearing occurs, the IBWA shall submit to the persons described in article 13.2.3. a reasoned decision explaining the action taken.
8.1.8 Decisions of the IBWA DHP may be appealed to Court of Arbitration for Sport as provided in article 13.
8.2: Hearing arising out of National Testing
8.2.1 When it appears, following the results management process described in article7, that these anti –doping rules have been violated in connection with testing other than in connection with the IBWA testing or testing at an international event, the athlete or other person involved shall be brought before a disciplinary panel of the athlete or other person involved shall be brought before a disciplinary panel of the Athlete or the other person’s national federation for the hearing to adjudicate whether a violation of these anti–doping rules occurred and if so what consequences should be imposed.
8.2.2. Hearings pursuant to this article 8.2 shall be completed expeditiously and in all cases within three months of the completion of the Results management process described in article7. Hearing held in connection with Events may be conducted by an expedited process. If the completion of the hearing is delayed beyond three months, IBWA may elect to bring the case directly before the IBWA DHP at the responsibility and at the expense of the national Federation.
8.2.3 National Federations shall keep IBWA and WADA fully apprised as to the status of pending cases and the results of all hearings.
8.2.4 The IBWA, Union concerned and WADA shall have the right to attend hearing as an observer.
8.2.5 The athlete or other person may forego a hearing by acknowledging the violation of these anti doping rules and accepting consequences consistent with article 9 and 10 as proposed by the National Federation. The right to the hearing may be waived either expressly or by the athlete or other person’s failure to challenge the national Federation’s assertion that anti-doping rule violation has occurred within four weeks where no hearing occurs; the national federation shall submit to the persons described in article 13.2.3 a reasoned decision explaining the action taken.
8.2.6 Decisions by national Federation, whether as the results of hearing or the athlete or other person’s acceptance of consequences, may be appealed as provided in article 13.
8.2.7 Hearing decisions by the national federation shall not be subject to further administrative review at the national level except as provided in article 13 or required by applicable national law.
8.3 Principles for a Fair Hearing: All hearing pursuant to the article 8.1 or 8.2 shall respect the following principles:
• a timely hearing;
• fair and impartial hearing body;
• the right to be represented by counsel at the person’s own expense;
• the right to be fairly and timely informed of the asserted anti –doping rule violation;
• the right to respond to the asserted anti-doping rule violation and resulting consequences;
• the right of each party to present evidence, including the right to call and question witnesses (subject to the hearing body’s discretion to accept testimony by telephone or written submission);
• the person’s right to an interpreter at the hearing, with the doping panel to determine the identity, and responsibility for the cost of the interpreter; and a timely, written, reasoned decision.

ARTICLE 9:   
AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFICATION OF INDIVIDUAL RESULTS
A violation of these anti-doping rules in connection with an in-competition test automatically leads to disqualification of the individual result obtained in that competition with all resulting consequences, including forfeiture of any medals, points and prizes.

ARTICLE 10:
SANCTION ON INDIVIDUALS
10.1 Disqualification of results in event during which an anti-doping rule violation occurs an anti doping rule violation occurring during or in connection with an event may lead to disqualification of all of the athlete’s individual results obtained in that event with all consequences, including forfeiture of all medals, points and prizes, except as provided in article 10.1.1.
(Comment to article 10.1: Whereas article 9(automatic disqualification of individual results) disqualifies the result in a single competition in which the athlete tested positive, this article may lead to disqualification of all results in all races during the event. Factors to be included in considering whether to disqualify other results in an event might include, for example, the severity of the athlete’s anti doping rule violation and whether the athlete tested negative in the other competitions) 
10.1.1 If the athlete establishes that he bears no fault or negligence for the violation, the athlete’s individual results in the other competition shall not be disqualified unless the athlete’s results in competition other than the competition in which the anti –doping rule violation occurred were likely to have been affected by the athlete’s anti-doping rule violation.
10.2 Ineligibility for presence, use or attempted use, or possession of prohibited substances and prohibited methods
The period of ineligibility imposed for violation of article 2.1(presence of prohibited substance or its metabolites or markers),article 2.2 (use or attempted use of prohibited substances or prohibited method) or article 2.6 (Possession of prohibited substances and Methods) shall be as follows, unless the conditions for eliminating or reducing the period of ineligibility, as provided in articles 10.4 and 10.5, or the conditions for increasing the period of ineligibility, as provided in article 10.6, are met: first violation: Two Years’ ineligibility.
(Comment to article 10.2: Harmonizing of sanctions has been one of the most discussed and debted areas of anti doping. Harmonizing means that the same rules and criteria are applied to assess the unique facts of each case. Arguments against requiring harmonization of sanctions are based on differences between sports including, for example, the following: in some sports the athletes are professionals making a sizable income from the sport and in others the athletes are true amateurs; in those sports where an athlete’s career is short ( e.g., artistic gymnastics) a two year disqualification has a much more significant effect on the athlete than in sports where careers are traditionally much longer (e.g. equestrian and shooting); in individual sports, the athlete is better able to maintain competitive skills through solitary practice during disqualification than in other sports, the athlete is better able to maintain competitive skills through solitary practice during disqualification than in other sports where practice as part of team is more important. A primary argument in favour of harmonization is that it is simply not right that two athletes from the same country who test positive for the same prohibited substance under similar circumstances should receive different sanctions only because they participate in different sports. In addition, flexibility in sanctioning has often been viewed as an unacceptable opportunity for some sporting bodies to be more lenient with dopers. The lack of harmonization of sanctions has also frequently been the source of jurisdictional conflicts between Ifs and national Anti-doping organization.
10.3. Ineligibility for other anti doping rule violations
The period of ineligibility for violations of these anti doping rules other than as provided in Article 10.2 shall be as follows:
10.3.1 For violation of article 2.3 (refusing  or failing to submit to sample collection) or article 2.5(Tempering with doping control), the ineligibility period shall be two(2)years unless the conditions provided in article 10.5, or the conditions provided in article 10.6,are met.
10.3.2 For violation of article 2.7 (trafficking) or article 2.8 (administration of prohibited substance or prohibited method), the period of ineligibility imposed shall be a minimum of four(4) years upto lifetime ineligibility unless the conditions provided in Article 10.5 are met. An anti-doping rule violation involving a minor shall be considered a particularly serious violation, and, if committed by athlete support personnel for violations other than specified substances shall results in lifetime ineligibility for such athlete support personnel. In addition, significant violations of such article which also violate non sporting laws and regulations shall be reported to the competent administrative, professional or judicial authorities. (Comment to article 10.3.2: Those who are involved in doping athletes who test positive. Since the authority of sport organizations is generally limited to ineligibility for credentials, membership and other sport benefits, reporting athlete support personnel to competent authorities is an important step in the deterrence of doping.)
10.3.3  For violations of article 2.4 (filing failures and /or missed tests), the period of ineligibility shall be at a minimum one year(1) year and at a maximum two(2) years based on the athlete’s degree of  fault.(comment to article10.3.3.: The sanction under article 10.3.3. shall be two years where all three filing failures or missed tests are inexcusable. Otherwise, the sanction shall be assessed in the range of two years to one year, based on the circumstances of the case.)
10.4 Elimination or Reduction of the period of ineligibility for specified substances under specific circumstances.
Where an athlete or other person can establish how a specified substance entered his body or come into his possession and that such specified substance was not intended to enhance the athlete’s sport performance or mask the use of a performance-enhancing substance, the period of ineligibility found in article 10.2 shall be replaced with the following:
First violation: At a minimum, a reprimand and no period of ineligibility from future events, and at a maximum, two (2) years of ineligibility.
To justify any elimination or reduction, the athlete or other person must produce corroborating evidence in addition to his word which establishes to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel the absence of an intent to enhance sport performance or mask the use of a performance enhancing substance. The athlete or the other person’s degree of fault shall be the criterion considered in assessing any reduction of the period of ineligibility.
(Comment to art.10.4: Specified substances as now defined in article 4.2.2. are not necessarily less serious agents for purposes of sports doping than other prohibited substances(for Example, a stimulant that is listed as a specified substance could be very effective to an athlete in competition); for that reason, an athlete who does not meet the criteria under this article would receive a two –year period of ineligibility and could receive up to a four year period of ineligibility under article 10.6.However, there is a greater likelihood that specified substances, as opposed to other prohibited substances, could be susceptible to a credible, non-doping explanation.
This article applies only in those cases where the hearing panel is comfortably satisfied by the objective circumstances of the case that in taking a prohibited substance did not intend to enhance his or her sport performance. Examples of the type of objective circumstances which in combination might lead a hearing panel to be comfortably satisfied on no performance-enhancing intent would include: the fact that the nature of the specified substance or the timing of its ingestion would not have been beneficial to the Athlete; the Athlete’s open use or disclosure of his use of the specified substance; and a contemporaneous medical records file substantiating the non-sport-related prescription for the specified substance. Generally, the greater the potential performance-enhancing benefit, the higher the burden on the athlete to prove lack of an  intent to enhance sport performance.
While the absence of intent to enhance sport performance must be established to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel, the athlete may establish how the specified substance entered the body by a balance of probability.
In assessing the athlete’s or other person’s degree of fault, the circumstances considered must be specific and relevant to explain the athlete’s or other person’s departure from the expected standard of behavior. Thus, for example, the fact that an athlete would lose the opportunity to earn large sums of money during a period of ineligibility or the fact that the athlete only has  short time left in his career or the timing of the sporting calendar would not be relevant factors to be considered in reducing the period of ineligibility under this article. It is anticipated that the period of ineligibility will be eliminated entirely in only the most exceptional cases.)
10.5 Elimination or reduction of period of indelibility based on exceptional circumstances
10.5.1 No fault or Negligence
If an athlete establishes in an individual case that he bears No fault or negligence, the otherwise applicable period of ineligibility shall be eliminated. When a prohibited substance or its markers or metabolites is detected in an athlete’s sample in violation of article 2.1(presence of prohibited substance), the athlete must also establish how the prohibited substance entered his system in order to have the period of ineligibility eliminated. In the event this article is applied and the period of ineligibility otherwise applicable is eliminated, the anti-doping rule violation shall not be considered a violation for the limited purpose of determining the period of ineligibility for multiple violations under article 10.7.
10.5.2 No significant fault or negligence.
If an athlete or other person establishes in an individual case that he bears No significant fault or negligence, then the period of ineligibility may be reduced, but the reduced period of ineligibility may not be less than one half of the period of ineligibility  otherwise applicable. If the otherwise applicable period of ineligibility is a lifetime, the reduced period under this section may be no less than 8 years. When a prohibited substance or its markers or metabolites is detected in an Athlete’s sample in violation of article 2.1(presence of prohibited substance entered his system in order to have the period of ineligibility reduced).
(comment to article 10.5.1 and 10.5.2: IF’s anti doping rules provide for the possible reduction or elimination of the period of ineligibility in the unique circumstance where the athlete can establish that he had no fault or negligence, or no significant fault or negligence, in connection with the violation. This approach is consistent with basic principles of human rights and provides a balance between those anti doping organizations that argue for a much narrow exception or none at all, and those that would reduce two year suspension based on arrange of other factors even when the athlete was admittedly at fault.
The basic sanction would be for two years under Article 10.2
Based on no significant fault alone, the sanction could be reduced up to one-half of the two years. Based on substantial assistance alone, the sanction could be reduced up to three-quarters of the two years. Thus, minimum sanction be six months.
The basic sanction would be between two and four years. The hearing panel would assess the athlete‘s fault in imposing a sanction within that range.

ARTICLE 11
FINANCIAL AND OTHER SANCTIONS ASSESSED AGAINST NATIONAL FEDERATION

11.1 The IBWA  Board of Directors have the authority, in addition to the other powers it possesses, to withhold some or all funding or other non financial support to NFs  that are not in compliance with these Rules.
11.2 The IBWA may elect to take additional disciplinary action against NFs  with respect to recognition and the eligibility of its officials and Athletes to participate in world championships, International events or Olympic Games.
 
ARTICLE 12
APPEALS
12.1 Decisions Subject to Appeal
Decisions made under these Rules may be appealed as set forth below in Article 12.2 through 12.4. Such decisions shall remain in effect while under appeal unless the appellate body orders otherwise.
12.2 Appeals from Decisions Regarding Anti-Doping Rule Violations, Consequences, and Provisional Suspensions
A decision that an anti-doping rule violation was committed, a decision imposing Consequences of an anti-doping rule violation, a decision that no anti-doping rule violation was committed, a decision that the IBWA lacks jurisdiction to rule on an alleged anti-doping rule violation or its Consequences, and a decision to impose a Provisional Suspension may be appealed exclusively as provided in this Article 12.2. Notwithstanding any other provision herein, the only Person that may appeal from a Provisional Suspension is the Athlete or other Person upon whom the Provisional Suspension is imposed.
12.2.1 In all cases arising from the World Championships, International events or Olympic Games, the decision may be appealed exclusively to the Court of Arbitration for Sport ("CAS") in accordance with the provisions applicable before such court.
12.2.2 In cases under Article 12.2.1, only the following parties shall have the right to appeal to CAS: (a) the Athlete or other Person who is the subject of the decision being appealed; (b) the relevant National Federation and any other Anti-Doping Organisation under whose rules a sanction could have been imposed; and (c) WADA.
12.3 Appeals from Decisions Granting or Denying a Therapeutic Use Exemption
Decisions by WADA reversing the grant or denial of a TUE exemption may be appealed exclusively to CAS by the Athlete, the IBWA, or Anti-Doping Organisation or other body designated by an NF’s which granted or denied the exemption. Decisions to deny TUEs, and which are not reversed by WADA, may be appealed by Athletes to CAS.
12.4 Appeal from Decisions Pursuant to Article 11
Decisions by the IBWA pursuant to Article 11 may be appealed exclusively to CAS by the NF’s.
12.5 Time for Filing Appeals
The time to file an appeal to CAS shall be within twenty-one (21) days from the date of receipt of the decision by the appealing party.

ARTICLE 13
CONFIDENTIALITY AND REPORTING
13.1. Confidentiality:
Subject to Article 13.2 below, any Person who has access to the file or who takes part in any stage of the procedure is bound by the duty of third party confidentiality.
13.2 Public Disclosure
IBWA Anti-Doping Rules –
The IBWA, the relevant National Federation, NOC and the Independent Observer Program shall use their best endeavours to maintain confidentiality of the results of all Doping Control and the identities involved in proceedings under these Rules until it has been determined in a hearing in accordance with Article 7 that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred, or such hearing has been waived, or the assertion of an anti-doping rule violation has not been timely challenged or the Athlete has been Provisionally Suspended. Once a violation of these Rules has been established, it shall be publicly reported no later than twenty (20) days after such decision.

ARTICLE 14:
MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF DECISIONS
14.1 Recognition by other organisations of Decisions made by the IBWA
Any decision of the IBWA regarding a violation of these Rules shall be recognized by all  NFs,& Continental Unions as well as by other Signatories and other bodies who wish to act in accordance with the Code, who shall take all necessary follow up action to render such results effective.
14.2 Recognition by the IBWA of Decisions made by other organisations
Subject to the right to appeal provided in Article 12, the Testing, TUEs and hearing results or other final adjudications of any Signatory to the Code which are consistent with the Code and are within the Signatory’s authority, shall be recognised and respected by the IBWA. The IBWA may recognize the same actions of other bodies which have not accepted the Code if the rules of those bodies are otherwise consistent with the Code.
ARTICLE 15:
APPLICABLE LAW, AMENDMENT AND INTERPRETATION OF ANTI-DOPING RULES
15.1 These Rules are governed by the Olympic Charter, by the Statutes and by Russian law.
15.2 These Rules may be amended from time to time by the IBWA  Board of Directors.
15.3 The headings used for the various Parts and Articles of these Rules are for convenience only and shall not be deemed part of the substance of these Rules or to affect in any way the language of the provisions to which they refer.
15.4 The INTRODUCTION and the APPENDICES shall be considered integral parts of these Rules.
15.5 These Rules have been adopted pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Code and shall be interpreted in a manner that is consistent with applicable provisions of the Code. The comments annotating various provisions of the Code may, where applicable, assist in the understanding and interpretation of these Rules.

ARTICLE 16:
 LANGUAGES
The English version of these Rules shall prevail.

APPENDIX 1 –
DEFINITIONS (referred to in the introduction)
Adverse Analytical Finding. A report from a laboratory or other approved Testing entity that identifies in a Specimen the presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers (including elevated quantities of endogenous substances) or evidence of the Use of a Prohibited Method.
Anti-Doping Organisation. A Signatory that is responsible for adopting rules for initiating, implementing or enforcing any part of the Doping Control process. This includes, for example, the International Olympic Committee, the International Paralympic Committee, other Major Event Organisations that conduct Testing at their Events, WADA, International Federations, and National Anti-Doping Organisations.
Athlete. For purposes of Doping Control, any Person who participates, or who may potentially participate, in the Olympic Games.
Athlete Support Personnel. Any coach, trainer, manager, agent, team staff, official, medical or para-medical personnel working with or treating Athletes participating in or preparing for the World Championship & Olympic Games.
Attempt. Purposely engaging in conduct that constitutes a substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in the commission of an anti-doping rule violation. Provided, however, there shall be no anti-doping rule violation based solely on an Attempt to commit a violation if the Person renunciates the attempt prior to it being discovered by a third party not involved in the Attempt.
Code. The World Anti-Doping Code in force at the time of the Olympic Games.
Competition. Any single  match, event or singular athletic contest.
Consequences of Anti-Doping Rules Violations. An Athlete's or other Person's violation of an anti-doping rule may result in one or more of the following: (a) Disqualification means the Athlete’s results in a particular Competition or Competitions are invalidated, with all resulting consequences including forfeiture of any medals, points and prizes; (b) Ineligibility means the Athlete or other Person is barred for a specified period of time from participating in any Competition or other activity or funding; and (c) Provisional Suspension means the Athlete or other Person is barred temporarily from participating in any Competition prior to the final decision at a hearing conducted under Article 7.
Disqualification. See Consequences of Anti-Doping Rules Violations above.
Doping Control. The process including test distribution planning, Sample collection and handling, laboratory analysis, results management, hearings and appeals.
In-Competition Period. The Period of the World Championships & Olympic Games.
Independent Observer Program. A team of observers, under the supervision of WADA, who observe the Doping Control process at the World Championship, International Event under the control of IBWA & Olympic Games and report on observations.
Ineligibility. See Consequences of Anti-Doping Rules Violations above.
National Federation or NF. An national non-governmental organisation, recognised by the IBWA, administering one or several sports at national level and encompassing organisations administering such sports at national level.
International Standard. A standard adopted by WADA in support of the Code. Compliance with an International Standard (as opposed to another alternative standard, practice or procedure) shall be 19 sufficient to conclude that the procedures addressed by the International Standard were performed properly. The current International Standards can be seen on the WADA website www.wada-ama.org.
International Standard for Laboratories. A standard adopted by WADA in support of the Code with regard to Laboratory Analysis.
International Standard for Testing. A standard adopted by WADA in support of the Code with regard to the Testing processes.
IBWA. International Belt Wrestling Association.
Marker. A compound, group of compounds or biological parameters that indicates the Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.
Metabolite. Any substance produced by a biotransformation process.
Minor. A natural Person under the age of eighteen years.
National Anti-Doping Organisation. The entity(ies) designated by each country as possessing the primary authority and responsibility to adopt and implement anti-doping rules, direct the collection of Samples, the management of test results, and the conduct of hearings, all at the national level. If this designation has not been made by the competent public authority(ies), the entity shall be the country's National Federation or its designee.
National Olympic Committee or NOC. An Organisation recognized as such by the International Olympic Committee.
No Advance Notice. A Doping Control which takes place with no advance warning to the Athlete and where the Athlete is continuously chaperoned from the moment of notification through Sample provision.
No Fault or Negligence. The Athlete's establishing that he or she did not know or suspect, and could not reasonably have known or suspected even with the exercise of utmost caution, that he or she had Used or been administered the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.
No Significant Fault or Negligence. The Athlete's establishing that his or her fault or negligence, when viewed in the totality of the circumstances and taking into account the criteria for No Fault or Negligence, was not significant in relationship to the anti-doping rule violation.
Olympic Games. The Games of the  Olympiad, 
Participant. Any Athlete or Athlete Support Personnel.
Period of the World Championship. The period commencing on the date of the opening of  the World Championship,  up until and including the day of the closing ceremony.
Person. A natural Person or an Organisation or other entity.
Possession. The actual, physical possession, or the constructive possession (which shall be found only if the Person has exclusive control over the Prohibited Substance/Method or the premises in which a Prohibited Substance/Method exists – see also World Anti-Doping Code, 2003, Definitions, page 76); provided, however, that if the Person does not have exclusive control over the Prohibited Substance/Method or the premises in which a Prohibited Substance/Method exists, constructive possession shall only be found if the Person knew about the presence of the Prohibited Substance/Method and intended to exercise control over it. Provided, however, there shall be no anti-doping rule violation based solely on possession if, prior to receiving notification of any kind that the Person has committed an anti-doping rule violation, the Person has taken concrete action demonstrating that the Person no longer intends to have Possession and has renounced the Person's previous Possession. For the avoidance of doubt, a Person may be in the Possession of a Prohibited
Method when such Person has in his/her actual physical or constructive possession some or all of the materials necessary to carry out the Prohibited Method
Prohibited List. The List identifying the Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods as published by WADA.
Prohibited Method. Any method so described on the Prohibited List.
Prohibited Substance. Any substance so described on the Prohibited List.
Provisional Suspension. See Consequences of Anti-Doping Rule Violations above.
Registered Testing Pool. All the Athletes identified by each NF’s, in consultation with the relevant Continental Union, as potentially competing at the World Championships or International Event or Olympic Games who are subject to Doping Control.
Rules. The International Belt Wrestling Anti-Doping Rules applicable to all event under its control.
Sample/Specimen. Any biological material collected for the purposes of Doping Control.
Signatories. Those entities signing the Code and agreeing to comply with the Code, including the International Olympic Committee, International Federations, International Paralympic Committee, National Olympic Committees, National Paralympic Committees, Major Event Organisations, National Anti-Doping Organisations, and WADA.
Tampering. Altering for an improper purpose or in an improper way; bringing improper influence to bear; interfering improperly to alter results or prevent normal procedures from occurring.
Target Testing. Selection of Athletes for Doping Control where specific Athletes or groups of Athletes are selected on a non-random basis for Doping Control at a specified time.
Team Sport. A sport in which the substitution of players is permitted during a Competition.
Testing. The parts of the Doping Control process involving test distribution planning, Sample collection, Sample handling, and Sample transport to the laboratory.
Trafficking. To sell, give, administer, transport, send, deliver or distribute a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method to an Athlete either directly or through one or more third parties, but excluding the sale or distribution (by medical personnel or by Persons other than an Athlete's Support Personnel) of a Prohibited Substance for genuine and legal therapeutic purposes.
Use. The application, ingestion, injection or consumption by any means whatsoever of any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.
WADA. The World Anti-Doping Agency.

APPENDIX 2 –
CRITERIA RELATING TO THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD FOR TESTING

The meaning of the capitalised terms (appearing in italics) contained in this Appendix are defined in the relevant International Standard or in Appendix 1 to the Rules.
The International Standard for Testing includes standards for test distribution planning, notification of Athletes, preparing for and conducting Sample collection, security/post test administration and transport of Samples. The IBWA requires organizers or any anti-doping organization performing tests on its behalf to plan and conduct the Doping Control in conformity with the International Standard.
There are a number of standards for which the IBWA as the Anti-Doping Organisation (ADO) is required to establish criteria. The following table outlines the requirements of the IBWA. Each item is referenced from the International Standard for Testing:
Ref.  Item  Criteria
5.3.4  The ADO shall establish criteria to validate the identity of an Athlete selected to provide a Sample. This ensures the selected Athlete is the Athlete who is notified.  The IBWA requires the Athlete to present his/her Olympic identity and accreditation card.
If the Athlete does not have an Olympic identity and accreditation card then an official identity document with photo is required.
5.3.6  For Sample Collection, the ADO shall establish criteria to ensure that reasonable attempts are made to notify Athletes of their selection for Sample collection  NFs are required to provide accurate Athlete Whereabouts information to the IBWA. This information will be used to locate and notify selected Athletes.
DCOs will be provided with this information as well as any training schedules managed by Organizer, and will make all reasonable attempts to locate and notify the Athletes.
The IBWA/Organizers will attempt to notify an Athlete using the Athlete Whereabouts information before it is considered that a doping violation has occurred according to the Rules.
6.2b)
6.3.3  The ADO shall establish criteria for who may be authorised to be present during a Sample Collection Session in addition to the Sample Collection Personnel (and the Athlete)  In addition to the Athlete and the Sample Collection Personnel, the following people may be present (see Standard for conditions) during a Sample Collection Session:

• Athlete representative

• Interpreter

• IBWA representative

• International Federation representative

• WADA Independent Observer

• Organizers management team

 
 PROCEDURE FOR ANTI-DOPING TEST

The International Belt Wrestling Association condemns competitors' use of prohibited substances and prohibited methods for reasons of fairness and health. The fact is that use of such prohibited substances and prohibited methods creates risks to health, some of them immediate and others for the longer term.
These regulations apply to all competitors; all competitors are subject to doping controls (urine analyses, blood tests and other authorized techniques for detecting prohibited substances or methods).
Any competitor must disclose at registration with the IBWA any positive test result for which he/she has been sanctioned by any National, Regional, Continental/Union or International Sports Organization, the IOC or any Governments or Governments Agencies.
The use of performance enhancing drugs ("dope") is strictly forbidden. A competitor who does not observe the regulations of the International Judo Federation (IBWA) with respect to dope tests, or who is found to have been guilty of using such drugs, is sanctioned, disqualified from a competition and forbidden to participate for 24 months in the world championships, in the Olympic Games, in continental championships and in all international tournaments (6 months in case ephedrine, 3 months in case of cannaboïdes....)

The IBWA recognizes the Olympic Movement Anti-Doping Code. The Code reflected the agreement of the Olympic Movement reached on November 27, 1998 and the conclusions of the World Conference on Doping in Sport as contained in the Lausanne Declaration of February 4, 1999, the latter accepting the Code as the basis for the fight against doping in sport. Furthermore in accordance with the Lausanne Declaration, the World Anti-Doping Agency (“WADA”) has been established as of November 10, 1999.
The International Olympic Committee, WADA and other constituents of Movement, related to preventing and fighting against doping in sport, the Federations and National Olympic Committees agree for the following:
- to unify the anti-doping rules, and procedures regarding drug tests,
- to adopt, each year as a basic document, the list of banned classes of methods of doping established by the IOC Medical Commission,
- to unify the sanctions provided in case of infraction of the anti-drug rules,
- to recognize the sanctions inflicted by another international federation,
- to use exclusively the laboratories accredited by the IOC/WADA for checks in connection with international competitions
-to participate in the international struggle against the traffic in performance-enhancing drugs in the sports field
-to apply the provisions fixed and determined by the Olympic Movement Anti-Doping Code.
-to accelerate unification of the minimum sanctions provided for by the IOC Medical Commission and the Olympic Movement Anti-Doping Code for violations of the anti-doping regulations and to ensure their application at both international and national level.

The IBWA organizes or delegates the organization of the testing of competitors during the IBWA Events (world championships and all competitions organized by or under the authority of the IBWA). The IBWA in collaboration with the WADA and also with the officially recognized national anti-doping organizations (if available) organizes/coordinates 'out' of competition testing.

The IBWA will recognize and uphold any sanction imposed upon a competitor by any National, Regional, Continental or International Sports Organization, the IOC or any Governments or Governments Agencies, provided that the IBWA is satisfied that the testing was properly carried out and that the rules of the body conducting the test afford sufficient protection to the competitors

The IBWA is entitled to revise any sanction for “dope” on any of its player made by its member federation
The IBWA is recognizing tests made “during” or “out” of a competition (test having been done by WADA, by the National Federations or by any National, Regional, Continental or International Sports Organization, the IOC or any Governments or Governments Agencies). The specific regulations regarding “Out-of-competition tests (OOCT) are placed under point 15.
Moreover the IBWA has the right to investigate and impose a sanction as a result of relevant information received of a positive result of doping of a member competitor even if the testing is organized by the officers of another activity in other sport providing the testing is carried out
under the regulations of the Olympic Movement (Olympic Movement Anti-doping Code) and either during a championship or out of competition.

CONTENTS:
 
REGULATIONS ON DOPE TESTS
PROCEDURE CONCERNING DOPE TESTS
Annex 1: FORM FOR SUMMONING COMPETITORS FOR DOPE TESTS
Annex 2: FORM FOR THE REPORT ON DOPE TESTS
Annex 3: FORM INTENDED FOR THE ACCREDITED LABORATORIES
Annex 4: LIST 0F THE LABORATORIES ACCREDITED BY THE IOC/WADA TO CARRY OUT DOPE TESTS

NOTE: In the Regulations and procedure concerning any tests of the International Judo federation, the masculine gender used in relation to any physical person (for example, names such as competitor, doctor, official, team leader personnel or pronouns such as he, they, them) shall, unless there is a specific provision to the contrary, be understood as including the feminine gender.

REGULATIONS CONCERNING DOPE TESTS

1 GENERAL PRINCIPLE

Doping (the use of prohibited substances and prohibited methods) is strictly forbidden.
Doping is:
1) the use of an expedient (substance or method) which is potentially harmful to competitors’ health and/or capable of enhancing their performance, or
2) the presence in the competitor’s body of a Prohibited Substance or evidence of the use thereof or evidence of the use of a Prohibited Method

2. DEFINITION OF DOPING
 
 Doping is defined as a competitor's use:
- of one of the forbidden doping substances contained in the list drawn up by the IOC Medical Committee,
 - of a doping procedure, such as blood doping,
  - of manipulation of urine, whether pharmacological, chemical or physical.
- any refusal to undergo a check or any attempt to avoid one shall be considered as tantamount to doping.

3          LIST OF PROHIBITED SUBSTANCES AND PROCEDURES

The list of substances and procedures forbidden by the IBWA is identical with the one drawn up by the IOC Medical Commission and regularly sent to all international and continental sports federations.
The IBWA undertakes to transmit the IOC list and the regular updating, as soon as they are received, to all of the federations belonging to the IBWA and to the continental unions.
This list is adopted by the IBWA as soon as it is published by the IOC.

It is used as a reference in the analyses made in connection with drug checks and in the definition of a positive check.
The list of doping procedures includes:
 -        forbidden medicinal substances and pharmacological classes,
- non-medicinal procedures, such as blood doping,
- urine manipulations carried out in connection with a check.

Note 1: IBWA considers the use of "cannabinoïds” dangerous in the sport of Judo; consequently their use is prohibited. In case of a positive result due to "cannabinoïds" the sanction will be applied according to article 17.3 and 19.

Note 2: Injectable local anaesthetics are permitted under the following conditions:
a) bupivacaine, lidocaine, mevipacaine, procaine, etc. can be used but not cocaine.
b) only local or intra-articular injections may be administered;
c) only when medically justified.

4 COMPETITIONS TO WHICH THE CHECKS RELATE

Drug checks are carried out at each world championship, at each cup and at each international tournament put on under IBWA aegis, grouping competitors, men or women, individuals or by teams or an individual world championship.

5. COMPETITORS CHECKED

The dope test check is carried out for each weight category on three competitors:
- the first one is the championship winner,
- one of the three other medal-winning competitors chosen by lot.
- one of the 5th and 7th placed competitors chosen by lot.
For a team championship or World Cup, the check is carried out on a member of each medal-winning team. The choice of the weight category is made by lot.

For an international tournament carried out under IBWA aegis, the check is made for each weight category on a single competitor on the podium, chosen by lot.
During other IBWA Tournaments this arrangement may be modified according to available resources. But where possible this format should be adhered to. It must include at least one competitor in each weight category drawn by lot from the four medallists

6. DRAWING LOTS

The process of drawing lots in order to determine the competitors to be checked is carried out by a small committee meeting at the initiative of the Physician mandated by the IBWA for the event in question.
This committee consists of:
 - the Physician mandated by the IBWA or by the IBWA Sports Director (or his substitute),
- an Official from the event's Organizing Committee, and a member of the national federation of the host country,
- the host country's Doping Control Physician.

The practical procedures relating to drawing lots are up either to the Physician mandated by the IBWA or to the IBWA Sports Director (or his substitute). The drawing is made before the start of the “Final Block” of the competition (Final Block = Finals of Repéchages, Final of Tables, third places and finals).

7. DELIVERY OF THE NOTIFICATION

The notification calling on competitors to take the dope tests must be written either on IBWA forms or accepted forms (under the provision they are abiding by the IOC, WADA Regulations) provided by the organizers.
They are drawn up and assigned by the Physician mandated by the IBWA. He/himself delivers the written notification directly to the competitors chosen to be checked.When delivering them, he asks the competitor to sign an acknowledgment of having received the notification. He gives the notification to the competitor and keeps the coupon bearing the competitor's signature. This coupon constitutes proof that the competitor has indeed received the notification and will make it possible, if the case arises, to take sanctions against him if he does not appear at the check station.

Notifications may not be delivered before a match, to avoid disturbing competitors called in for checks. The notifications are delivered solely after matches.

They may be delivered at the end of a match for the “competitor” drawn among the 5th and 7th..
The notifications for the 2 other competitors of each weight category (the 1st one and one of the three other medalists drawn) should be delivered at the time the prizes are handed out.

8. ARRIVAL AT THE CHECK STATION

The way to the check station must be clearly indicated from the competition hall, as far as the premises used for the checks.

The competitors called in must go to the check station immediately after the prize ceremony, within a maximum of I hour after the notification.

They may be accompanied by a person of their choice (national team doctor, trainer, coach, delegation head).

To avoid identification errors, the competitors undergoing checks must have their written notification and their PASS issued for the competition when they go to the check station.

If a competitor refuses of fails to report to the doping check station within one hour after the receipt of the doping control notification, this fact will be noted on the Doping Control Official Record and will be reported to the IBWA President or his representative. The IBWA President or his Representative will then decide on the further steps to be taken.

9. CHECK PROCEDURE

The check procedure must comply with the rules set forth by the IOC/WADA. Observance of the said rules must be verified on the spot by the physician who is a member of the Medical Committee and mandated by the IBWA.

If the procedure does not comply with the rules, the Physician mandated by the IBWA must draw up a report and the result of the check may not be recognized as valid.

The check is made on the urine for the IBWA Events, nevertheless blood tests and other authorized techniques for detecting prohibited substances or methods can be requested under certain circumstance by the IOC/WADA.

The reports on the check results must be drawn Up on IBWA forms or accepted forms (under the provision they are abiding by the IOC, WADA Regulations) provided by the organizers. They are signed by the competitor and the person accompanying him, by the Doping Control Physician and by the Physician mandated by the IBWA.

They are drawn up in two copies, one for the competitor undergoing the check and the other for the IBWA President.

At the end of the checks, all of the individual reports are turned over to the Physician mandated by the IBWA, who must send them as soon as possible to the IBWA General Secretariat.

10 URINE ANALYSIS

The urine analyses are carried out solely at laboratories accredited by the IOC/WADA (Listed in Annex 4).

11. CHECK RESULTS

The results of the checks are sent by the accredited Laboratory to the IBWA, either directly or via the national federation of the country hosting the competition.

a) A result is positive when the “A” sample is positive and any such result may be acted upon for purposes of any competition or out-of-competition test.

Negative results are recorded at the IBWA General Secretariat and are not communicated to the competitors concerned. If they wish, they may write to the IBWA General Secretariat to request the results of their personal urine analysis.

Whether negative or positive, results by name are never published by the IBWA. The individual results may be communicated only to the interested parties if they submit a written request to the General Secretariat.

12. ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS

A competitor may, however, request that the “B” sample be analyzed. Should the analysis show the “B” sample to be negative:

a) no further sanctions shall apply, but the initial sanction (disqualification) shall nevertheless remain in full force and effect, however
 b)  if, without otherwise affecting the competitions, it is still possible for the competitor to be “reinserted”, the competitor may continue to take part in the competitions (for example, if a competitor is entered in Open Category…).

If the analysis of the “B” sample is carried out at the same laboratory as the one that analyzed bottle A, the laboratory personnel who carry out the analysis of the “B” sample must be entirely different. If this is not possible, the “B” sample must be analyzed by a different laboratory.

The additional analysis must be carried out within one month after the notification of the result of the first analysis. That is why the result of the “A” sample must be sent as quickly as possible by the accredited laboratory to the IBWA (within maximum one month after the urine sample has been taken), and then by the IBWA to the competitor by way of his national federation.

After the said one-month period, the additional analysis becomes invalid.

13 CHECK POSITIVITY

A result is positive,
- when the “A” sample is positive
- if the competitor summoned in writing has not appeared at the check station following the   prize ceremony,
- if he has attempted to alter the test results by fraud,
- if the Physician mandated by the IBWA notes blood doping during the competition or urine manipulation in connection with the test.

14. DEFENSE PROCEDURE and APPEALS

Defense Procedure:
Any competitor whose check turns out to be positive is entitled to defend himself.
If he wishes, he may submit defense documents in which he explains the circumstances of taking the drug, indicating the suppliers, if any, or accomplices in the doping.
He may also justify, on medical grounds, the use of a forbidden substance.
This defense dossier is sent by the competitor himself to the IBWA President. The IBWA Board of Directors will read it before it takes any sanctions.

Appeals:
Any competitor affected by a decision rendered in application of the IBWA Anti Doping Rules by the IBWA may appeal from that decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, in accordance with the provisions applicable before such court.

15.  SPECIFIC PROVISIONS REGARDING THE OUT-OF-COMPETITION TESTING (OOCT) BY IBWA

OOCT may be conducted by IBWA, by an IBWA authorized organization or on behalf and in collaboration with World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) or by WADA authorized organization at any time, including at the time or location of any competition in every member country. Preferably it shall be carried out without any advance notification to the competitor or his federation. Every competitor affiliated to any IBWA member federation is obliged to undergo OOCT decided by IBWA or WADA.
When OOCT is conducted within three (3) days of a competition in which the affected competitor has competed or is entered or expected to compete, the test shall be considered as in competition. All other unannounced doping control shall be deemed to be OOCT.
Every member federation shall include in their rules a provision obliging their member to allow OOCT of any competitor under its jurisdiction. It is the duty of every member federation to assist IFJ and WADA and, if appropriate, other member federations in carrying out OOCT. Any member federation preventing, hindering or otherwise obstructing the carrying out of such testing shall be liable to sanctions (according to the IBWA Statutes ,particularly article 2 point 2.2 and article 22 point 22.5…).
IBWA and/or WADA can/shall keep a register of competitors who are being subject to OOCT. Member federations shall have the obligation to submit names, current places of living, addresses, telephone numbers, training times and training locations for individuals and teams requested by IBWA and WADA, to enable IBWA and WADA to conduct OOCT.
IBWA and/or WADA can select competitors being subject to OOCT among all member federation competitors. The selection can be done by ballot or any other principal that is decided by IBWA and/or WADA.

Collection of urine samples at unannounced out-of-competition doping control
When a competitor has been selected for OOCT the International Doping Control Officer (IDCO) appointed by IBWA or WADA may either make an appointment to meet the competitor or, at preference, he may arrive unannounced to the competitor’s training camp, accommodation or any other place where the competitor is likely to be found. In either case, the IDCO shall prove proof of identity and provide a letter of appointment from IBWA or WADA. The IDCO shall also require proof of identity of the competitor. The actual collection of the sample shall be in as much accordance with IBWA´s ”Drug Check Procedure” item 1-11 as reasonable practicable.
Arrangements for collection of the sample shall be made as soon as possible after the appointment with the competitor has been made. It is the competitor’s responsibility to check the arranged date, time and precise location of the meeting.
Where an IDCO arrives unannounced he must give the competitor reasonable time to complete any reasonable activity in which she/he is engaged, but testing should commence as soon as possible.
Each competitor selected for OOCT shall, as a part of the collection procedure, in conjunction with the IDCO complete IBWA forms  or other form or its equivalent proposed by IBWA and/or WADA.
If the competitor refuses to provide a urine sample, the IDCO shall note this on the doping control form used, sign his name on the form and ask the competitor to sign the form. The IDCO shall also note any other irregularities in the doping control process.
The nature of the unannounced OOCT makes it desirable to that little or no prior warning is given to the competitor. Every effort will be made by the IDCO to collect the sample speedily and efficiently with the minimum of interruption to the competitors training, social, training or work arrangements. If there is an interruption, however, no competitor may take any action to gain compensation for any inconvenience incurred.

16. THERAPEUTIC JUSTIFICATION

To justify the use of a forbidden substance on medical grounds, the competitor must provide a medical file containing:
- proof of the disease in question, by sending the results of special examinations made for purposes of diagnosis,
- proof of the therapeutic need for taking a forbidden substance and of the impossibility of  other therapy that would be permitted.

Medical justification is rare but possible. It may concern certain types of asthma, for example.
The medical file provided in justification is sent by the competitor himself to the Physician mandated by the IBWA. The latter must study the file and may request opinions from medical specialists before drawing up a note for the IBWA President. The said note will be read to the IBWA Board of Directors before it takes any sanctions.

17. SANCTIONS

For any failure to disclose at registration with the IBWA any positive test result for which he has been sanctioned by any National, Regional, Continental or, the IOC or any Governments Agencies: immediate suspension and depending the results of the IBWA investigation, the IBWA may extend the sanction of the concerned competitor for an additional period of suspension according to the limits provided in the Olympic Movement Anti-Doping Code. The IBWA must notify the competitor within 30 days of its decision.
If the competitor has not attained age of majority, the IBWA must notify the parents, guardians or legal representatives.

In case of a positive check, the IBWA Board of Directors takes the sanctions before deciding on sanctions, the Board of Directors must familiarize itself with the defense dossier or with the reality of therapeutic justification.

The entry into force of the sanction shall be effective from the date the sample is provided consequently the results of a competitor found guilty of doping between that date and any final decision on the case be invalidated and possible medal withdrawn, whatsoever testing has been done either “in competition” or “out of competition».

For a first infraction the incriminated competitor is disqualified from the competition in question. He is removed from the standings. He must return his medal and any other prize received at the prize ceremony, plus

1) He is suspended by the IBWA for 24 months starting at the date of the sample of urine has been taken. If the competitor has participated to some event after the date when the positive result has been communicated, the duration between this date and the participation will be added to the 2 years. He may not take part in a world championship, in a continental championship, in the Olympic Games or in any international tournament held under IBWA auspices.and

2) in case of a positive result for ephedrine, phenylpropanolamine, pseudoephedrine, caffeine, strychnine and related substances he will be suspended for six months.

The sanction is the same if therapeutic justification is not firmly established, or if it is doubtful or incomplete.

In case of clearly established therapeutic justification, there is no sanction.

3) in case of a positive result for “cannaboïdes” he will be suspended for 3 months

Note: under exceptional circumstances to be evaluated in the first instance by the IBWA Board of Directors, there may be provision for a possible modification of the two-years sanction, the six-months sanction.& 3 months

If the competitor's defense points to complicity in drug use, it is up to the IBWA Board of Directors to take appropriate sanctions against the accomplices and the drug suppliers and the leaders of the federations concerned. If appropriate, the IBWA may call on the services of the police specializing in combating international traffic on doping agents and drugs.

In all cases of doping, the sanctions adopted by the IBWA Board of Directors are communicated to the IOC,WADA & GAISF and to all continental unions.

18. REHABILITATION
Rehabilitation is not automatic at the end of the suspension period. The competitor who has been sanctioned and the federation must ask the IBWA Board of Directors in writing for the right to reinstatement in order to take part in the international championships and tournaments. Reinstatement becomes effective only after a favorable decision by the IBWA Board of Directors. Notification of the said decision is given in writing, and is sent to the competitor, to his federation, to the continental unions and to the IOC and WADA.

19. REPEAT OFFENDERS

If a competitor repeats the doping offense, he is disqualified from the competition, plus, in cases referred in paragraph 1 of article 17, he is banned for life.
He is not entitled to take part in any international competition, world championships, the Olympic Games, continental championships or tournaments carried out under IBWA auspices.
He is not eligible to be elected to the IBWA Board of Directors or the Board of Directors of a continental union, or to vote.
The penalty for a second infraction, in cases referred to paragraph 2 of Article 17, will be a suspension for two years and for any subsequent infraction, a life ban.
The penalty for a second infraction, in cases referred to paragraph 3 of article 17, will be a suspension of 2 years and for any subsequent infraction (third) 8 years suspension.

DRUG CHECK PROCEDURE

 I    CHECK STATION ORGANIZATION

The check station must be located within the competition stadium.
It consists of two rooms:
- one for the check formalities,
- the other for waiting.

The checkroom is equipped with a large table and a few chairs. It must have a lock, and the Doping Control Physician is entrusted with the key.
Near the said room, there is a lavatory (WC) cubicle specifically assigned to drug checks.

The waiting room must be large and be equipped with chairs, so that at least twenty persons can use it at the same time.

The way to the check station must be clearly indicated from the competition hall and all along the itinerary to the check station.

2. CHECK STATION INSTALLATION

The Doping Control Physician designated by the host country authorities must arrive at least one hour before the final block. He installs all the equipment required for the checks.

The Physician mandated by the IBWA meets with the Doping Control Physician and makes sure that ail of the equipment has been installed and that ail of the conditions have been met for strict performance of dope checks.
The Physician mandated by the IBWA supplies the Doping Control Physician with the IBWA form (Annexes 2 and 3) making it possible to draw up the reports.

3 ARRIVAL OF THE COMPETITORS TO BE TESTED

At the end of the prize ceremony, the competitors summoned in writing by the Physician mandated by the IBWA follow the indications leading them to the check station. Persons constantly accompany them from the organization from the time they receive their notification until they reach the check station.
They are met by the Doping Control Physician and by the Physician mandated by the IBWA.
They are taken into the waiting room, where they may rest and drink the beverages provided by the competition organizers:
- water in sealed bottles,
- beer,
- sodas (soft drinks).
Beverages containing caffeine are forbidden.

The competitors may be accompanied by a person of their choice (team doctor, coach, trainer, delegation head).

4 IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURE
If they so wish, the competitors enter the check station one by one, together with the person accompanying them.

The identity of each competitor is checked by means of the PASS issued for the competition, and of the written notification delivered by the Physician mandated by the IBWA at the end of the matches. The said identity is indicated Legibly in the report forms (Annex 2).

To identify the bottles, the competitor chooses a number consisting of at least two digits. This number will be used as codes to be recorded on bottles A and B;
 The identity of the accompanying person is also checked.

5.  CHOICE OF ARTICLES

The competitor shall select a collection vessel, visually check that it is empty, dean, dry and wrapped in a sealed pouch, proceed to the toilet and urinate a minimum of 75 ml into the collection vessel under the observation of the Doping Control Physician or, of a qualified person appointed by him, who shall be of the same gender as the competitor.
The competitor shall return to the consulting area with the collection vessel containing the urine.
If the requested urine volume of 75 ml has been provided, the competitor shall select a urine control kit, open it and place the contents on the table in front of him. He shall check that the bottles are empty and clean.

Sometimes the bottle opening is large enough to allow direct urination into the bottles, without any need for a urine container.

6. GATHERING URINE

The urination must take place in the presence of Doping Control Physician or of the Physician mandated by the IBWA or of a qualified person appointed by them, as they must attest to the origin of the urine and can discover possible urine manipulation.

The minimum amount of urine provided is 75ml. The Doping Control Physician shall measure the specific gravity and ph of the urine left in collection vessel. The urine pH should not be less than 5 and not greater than 7 and the urine should have a specific gravity of 1.010 or higher. if the sample does not meet these specifications, the Doping Control Physician may require further samples
Competitors may be disturbed by having to urinate in the presence of a supervisor of the opposite gender, that is why the Doping Control Physician, by agreement with the Physician mandated by the IBWA, may ask another person of the appropriate gender to observe the urine gathering. This person shall have to be an official who is a member of the host country federation, and the Physician mandated by the IBWA will note his or her identity.

If this amount is not reached, the urine that has been gathered is temporarily sealed to avoid falsification and the competitor returns to the waiting room to take in water. He may not leave the stadium until the check procedure has been completed.

For each championship, whether world or cup or tournament1 the checks bear on all weight categories (men and women) the urine gathering.

The competitor shall declare to the Doping Control Physician any medication he may have taken in the preceding three days. The Doping Control Physician shall record this statement on the doping control official record.

7. PROCESSING THE BOTTLES

The competitor shall pour approximately two thirds of the urine from the collection vessel into bottle A and one third into bottle B. A few drops of urine shall remain in the collection vessel. Next, the competitor shall close the two bottles hermetically and check that no leakage occurs.

The Physician mandated by the IBWA must verify that the sealing system provides hermetic sealing.

The Doping Control Physician shall check that the code numbers on the bottles and shipping containers are identical, and record the code number on the doping control official record.. The competitor shall then check that the code numbers on the bottles and shipping containers are identical to that recorded on the doping control official record. The competitor shall place the bottles A and B into the respective shipping containers and close them carefully and the Doping Control Physician shall verify that these are completely closed.
The said containers must be sealed in such a way as to prevent any opening. There are various systems, such as wax, lead or a clip. The Physician mandated by the IBWA must verify the fact that the box cannot be opened without breaking the seals.

8. REPORTS

At the end of the process of packing the urine, a report must be drawn up on the IBWA forms (Annex 2).
The said reports will show:
- the identity of the competitor, his last name, his given name, his country, his weight and his classification,
- the place of the check,
- the date, appearance time and time of supplying the urine,
- the numbers of the codes written on the bottles,
- the numbers of the seals of the boxes containing the bottles,
- the medicines the competitor has taken in the last 72 hours.

This report is signed by:
- the competitor and the person accompanying him,
- the Doping Control Physician,
- and the Physician mandated by the IBWA.
By signing, these persons attest to their agreement to the dope test procedure.

Reserves or comments may be made on the report by one of the signing parties.

The report is drawn up in 2 copies:
- one of them is given to the competitor,
- and the other is given to the Physician mandated by the IBWA in order that he sends it to the IBWA General Secretariat.

In addition to the report, a sheet is filled out that is intended for the laboratory (Annex3).
This sheet indicates the codes placed on the bottles and the medicines declared by the competitor.
This sheet must not, in any case, contain any indications making it possible to identify the competitor directly.

9.  PROTECTING THE BOTTLES

Urine is a biological fluid that can deteriorate when exposed to heat.

The processed and packaged bottles must be kept in a cool refrigerator, before being sent to a laboratory accredited by the IOC/WADA.

The place in which the bottles are kept must be locked, on the Doping Control Physician's responsibility.

10.  SHIPPING THE BOTTLES

The processed bottles are shipped to a laboratory accredited by the IOC/WADA on the Doping Control Physician's responsibility.
The choice of the accredited laboratory is made by the authorities of the host country, generally depending on the distance.
The Doping Control Physician must inform the Physician mandated by the IBWA about:
- the shipping procedures
- date of shipment,
- the address of the accredited laboratory chosen by the host country's authorities.

The analysis may not be carried out by a laboratory that is not accredited by the IOC/WADA (list in Annex 4).

11 CLOSING THE CHECK STATION

The drug check may last for several hours, depending on the number of competitors to check and their ability to urinate.
The check station is closed when all the checks have been carried out. No check may be postponed or be transferred to another place.
The organizers of competitions must make arrangements for transporting the competitors and the Physician mandated by the IBWA to their rooms after the check.

The above cited rules & Procedure have been approved and adopted by the GA in Ufa-Russia on 10/10/2007 and the amendment were made and approved by the  Board of Directors of IBWA in its meeting held on   06/06/2008   at European  Hotel, Mariupol- Ukraine