Lost in translation? The European Convention on Human Rights at the Court of Arbitration for Sport

被引:0
作者
Antoine Duval
机构
[1] Asser Institute,
来源
The International Sports Law Journal | 2022年 / 22卷
关键词
Court of Arbitration for Sport; European Convention on Human Rights; Mutu and Pechstein; European Court of Human Rights; Transnational law;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) is not known as a human rights court. Instead, its primary focus is on applying and interpreting the regulations of international (and sometimes national) sport governing bodies (SGBs). It is only recently that the intersection between the CAS jurisprudence and human rights has become of interest in the academic literature and public debates. In particular, the Mutu and Pechstein decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in October 2018 made clear that the CAS does not escape the indirect scrutiny of the Strasbourg court. Nevertheless, until today, very few publications have been dedicated to the interplay between the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the CAS. This paper aims to contribute to remedying this want by charting the CAS awards in which a reference to the ECHR or a decision of the ECtHR was made and tracing the impact and function of such references in the CAS jurisprudence. The findings highlight the various functions of the references to the ECHR in CAS awards, the discrepancies between some of the interpretations of the ECHR advanced by the CAS and the ECtHR’s own understanding of the Convention, and the limited success of appellants to challenge SGBs’ decisions on the basis of the ECHR. The paper concludes by arguing that the CAS would need to be institutionally reformed in order for human rights to act as an effective check on the transnational power of SGBs in CAS proceedings.
引用
收藏
页码:132 / 151
页数:19
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]  
Bützler B(2020)Constitutionalizing FIFA: promises and challenges Tilburg Law Rev 25 40-54
[2]  
Schöddert L(2011)The making of a Lex Sportiva by the Court of Arbitration for Sport Ger Law J 12 1317-1340
[3]  
Casini L(1979)The European Human Rights Convention and relations between Private Parties Neth Int Law Rev 26 163-181
[4]  
Drzemczewski A(2020)FIFA and human rights—a research agenda Tilburg Law Rev 25 1-11
[5]  
Duval A(2016)L’arbirage sportif, la lutte contre le dopage et le respect des droits fondamentaux des sportifs professionnels: une incertitude peu glorieuse Revue Trimestrielle Des Droits De L'homme 108 817-853
[6]  
Heerdt D(2013)Some thoughts on the role of the European Convention on Human Rights in the jurisprudence of the Court of Arbitration for Sport Yearb Int Arbitr 3 307-314
[7]  
Frumer P(2018)Athletes’ rights under the World Anti-Doping Code: a legitimate public interest? Altern Law J 43 197-202
[8]  
Geistlinger M(2018)The International Olympic Committee and human rights reforms: game changer or mere window dressing? Int Sports Law J 17 160-169
[9]  
Gappmaier S(2012)Role and application of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights in CAS procedures Int Sports Law Rev 3 43-60
[10]  
Goldsworthy D(2010)Caught in the net: athletes’ rights and the World Anti-Doping Agency South Calif Interdiscipl Law J 19 533-564