The case involves a dispute between the Taekwondo Federation of Moldova (TFM) and the National Olympic and Sports Committee of Moldova (NOSC) regarding the suspension of TFM's membership by NOSC. The suspension was based on allegations that TFM had arbitrarily excluded athletes and coaches from competitions, violating the Olympic Charter and NOSC Statute. TFM denied these allegations and appealed the decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The CAS panel examined the legal principles surrounding provisional suspensions, emphasizing that the burden of proof lies with the party making the claim, as per Swiss law. The panel noted that sports federations can determine their own standards of proof, but in the absence of specific regulations, CAS must decide the appropriate standard. For provisional suspensions, the standard is lower than "comfortable satisfaction" but higher than mere speculation, requiring a "reasonable possibility" supported by individualized suspicion.
The factual background reveals multiple incidents where TFM allegedly excluded athletes without justification. These included the exclusion of Mr. Stepan Dimitrov from the 2015 Moscow Competition, a qualifying event for the 2016 Olympics, and the denial of participation for the Dimitrov brothers in the Samsun Competition. Despite requests for explanations, TFM reportedly failed to respond adequately. Further allegations involved the exclusion of athletes from the National Team and the Balkan Games, as well as the refusal to allow students from the Republican Boarding Lyceum with Sports Profile (RBLSP) to participate in the National Championships. NOSC's decision to suspend TFM was based on these alleged violations, which TFM contested, arguing no wrongdoing. The CAS panel's task was to assess whether NOSC met the required standard of proof for a provisional suspension.
The conflicts culminated in a meeting called by the NOSC in March 2017 to address grievances raised by the Dimitrovs and others, highlighting systemic issues within TFM’s governance and its impact on athletes and coaches. The document underscores a pattern of arbitrary decisions, lack of communication, and alleged violations of sports policies, which collectively hindered the participation and careers of Moldovan taekwondo athletes and coaches in national and international competitions. The NOSC Executive Board (EB) examined these issues and found TFM in serious violation of both Olympic principles and Moldovan legislation. The EB unanimously voted to suspend TFM, a decision that remains provisional until confirmed by the General Assembly.
The case highlights tensions between sports federations and national committees, emphasizing the importance of fair treatment for athletes and adherence to procedural fairness in disciplinary actions. The CAS panel upheld the provisional suspension, finding that NOSC had demonstrated a "reasonable possibility" of TFM's violations, warranting the measure until a full investigation could be conducted. The decision underscores the balance between protecting athletes' rights and ensuring fair procedural standards in sports governance. The Court of Arbitration for Sport ultimately dismissed TFM's appeal and upheld the NOSC's decision, along with rejecting all additional motions. The case underscores systemic issues within TFM, including lack of accountability, transparency, and adherence to legal and ethical standards in sports governance.