The document is an advisory opinion from the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) dated December 21, 1995, requested by the European Olympic Committees (COE) regarding the regulation of doping in international multidisciplinary competitions organized by associations of National Olympic Committees (NOCs). The opinion builds on a prior CAS ruling (TAS 94/128) which addressed the competence to regulate doping in international cycling competitions, concluding that the International Cycling Union (UCI) held primary authority unless it fully adopted the IOC Medical Code, with NOCs having only subsidiary competence. The COE posed two main questions: whether associations of NOCs organizing multidisciplinary competitions (e.g., Pan American Games, Mediterranean Games) can fully apply the IOC's anti-doping regulations, and whether these associations are competent in this matter. The CAS procedure was governed by its arbitration code, and the COE, as an IOC-recognized association, was eligible to request the opinion.
The COE argued that NOC associations conducting multidisciplinary competitions should implement anti-doping controls aligned with IOC regulations, drawing an analogy to the Olympics where the IOC Medical Code prevails over international federations' (IFs) rules. The CAS panel emphasized the need for coherence and collaboration among stakeholders—sports organizations and public authorities—to combat doping effectively. While sports bodies, led by the IOC, take primary responsibility, public authorities play a complementary role, particularly in regulating peripheral aspects like the distribution of banned substances. This dual approach is reflected in international agreements such as the 1989 Council of Europe Convention and the 1994 Lausanne Agreement, which stress shared but distinct responsibilities.
The panel highlighted that the Olympic Charter is the primary source of authority for anti-doping regulation. Competence to regulate doping depends on the context: IFs oversee their respective sports, while NOCs and their associations handle multidisciplinary events. The panel suggested that, similar to the Olympics, the IOC's rules should take precedence in such competitions unless conflicting national laws create obstacles. In such cases, national authorities should facilitate compliance with international sports rules to avoid conflicts. The opinion underscores the importance of coordinated efforts at both national and international levels, with sports bodies and public authorities working together to ensure effective anti-doping measures.
The IOC Medical Code, established in 1995, serves as the foundational framework for anti-doping, requiring all Olympic Movement members to adhere to its provisions. It applies to athletes participating in competitions under the IOC's authority and mandates that IFs and NOCs incorporate its rules into their statutes. The document outlines the distribution of responsibilities among sports entities: national single-discipline events are regulated by the relevant national federation, while multidisciplinary national competitions should be overseen by a central national body like an NOC. For multinational single-discipline competitions, the respective IF retains primary jurisdiction until it fully adopts the IOC Medical Code. Large-scale multidisciplinary events like the Olympics are governed by the Olympic Charter and the IOC Medical Code.
The opinion concludes that the IOC Medical Code should be the primary regulatory framework for anti-doping in multidisciplinary competitions organized by continental or regional NOC associations. The constitutive texts governing these competitions should explicitly reference the IOC Medical Code as the applicable anti-doping regulation, with other regulations applying only subsidiarily in cases of gaps or through explicit referral. The opinion stresses the importance of transparency and consistency in anti-doping measures to ensure fairness and universality in sports. It acknowledges that while not all IFs have fully accepted the IOC Medical Code, applying inconsistent regulations could lead to unjustified inequalities. The IOC Medical Code represents a significant step toward unifying anti-doping standards, ensuring equal treatment for all athletes regardless of nationality or sport.