本文關鍵詞： 體育法學 世界反興奮劑條例 嚴格責任 過失 故意 詐騙　出處：《武漢體育學院學報》2017年03期 　論文類型：期刊論文

【摘要】：《世界反興奮劑條例》對興奮劑處罰規(guī)定了三個歸責原則:興奮劑違規(guī)適用嚴格責任,一般性處罰適用過失責任,加重處罰適用故意責任。由于心理要素事實具有模糊性,且證據(jù)無法記述其存在,故在實踐中很難將三者區(qū)分,以心理要素作為處罰的條件,極易造成興奮劑處罰權的失控,危及運動員的權利,使興奮劑處罰與反興奮劑運動的目的發(fā)生沖突。為了協(xié)調兩者的關系,有效地控制興奮劑的使用,條例應當以懲罰性賠償制度為理論基礎,借鑒美國橄欖球聯(lián)盟的藥品政策,一則加強對興奮劑的日常監(jiān)管,二則降低處罰,三則以刑事處罰做補充。這種藥品政策不僅能確保興奮劑處罰的正當性和打擊使用興奮劑行為的有效性,而且,還符合我國的國情,有利于維護我國體育在國際上的正面形象。
[Abstract]:The World Anti-Doping regulations stipulate three imputation principles for doping punishment: strict liability for doping violation and negligence liability for general punishment. Due to the ambiguity of the fact of psychological elements and the fact that the evidence can not record their existence, it is difficult to distinguish the three in practice and take psychological elements as the condition of punishment. It is easy to cause out of control of the right to punish doping, endanger the rights of athletes, make the purpose of doping punishment and anti-doping campaign conflict. In order to coordinate the relationship between the two, effectively control the use of stimulants. The regulations should be based on the punitive damages system and draw lessons from the drug policy of the American Rugby League. One is to strengthen the daily supervision of doping and the other is to reduce the penalty. This drug policy not only ensures the legitimacy of doping punishment and the effectiveness of cracking down on the use of doping, but also conforms to the national conditions of our country. It is beneficial to maintain the positive image of Chinese sports in the world.
【作者單位】： 中國石油大學(華東)文學院法律系;
【基金】：青島市社科規(guī)劃項目“最后的手段原則規(guī)則化視野下的欺詐問題研究”(QDSKL1601041)
【分類號】：D99;G803
【正文快照】： 2009年的《世界反興奮劑條例》(以下簡稱為《條例》或WADC)生效后,雖然得到了很多國家、世界組織甚至是一些運動員的擁護,但其同時也受到了很多人,特別是法律界的質疑。歐盟為此曾成立了一個專門的工作小組,就《條例》與歐洲法的沖突問題,提供專家意見。該小組先后提交了兩份，

本文編號：1470238