Avis Consultatif TAS 2009/C/1824 CIO
CAS 2009/O/1824 IOC
To confront former offenders-and in so doing preventing potential future offenders from participating in the Olympic Games, the IOC Executive Board enacted at its meeting in Osaka (Japan) the following rule which came to be known as the “Osaka Rule” on June 27 20081:
“The IOC Executive Board, in accordance with Rule 19.3.10 OC and pursuant to Rule 45OC, hereby issues the following rules regarding participation in the Olympic Games:
1.) Any Person who has been sanctioned with a suspension of more than six months by any anti-doping organization for any violation of any anti-doping regulations may not participate, in any capacity, in the next edition of the Games of the Olympiad and of the Olympic Winter Games following the date of expiry of such suspension.
2.) These Regulations apply to violations of any anti-doping regulations that are committed as of 1 July 2008. They are notified to all International Federations, to all National Olympic Committee and to all Organizing Committees for the Olympic Games.”
However on 4 October 2011 the CAS Panel rendered its decision in the case CAS 2011/O/2422 USOC v. IOC about the validity of the “Osaka Rule”.
The Panel declared “the IOC Executive Board’s 27 June 2008 decision prohibiting athletes who have been suspended for more than six months for an anti-doping rule violation from participating in the next Olympic Games following the expiration of their suspension […] invalid and unenforceable.”
Hereafter in April 2009 the IOC requested CAS for an Advisory Opinion (CAS 2009/C/1824 IOC) about the “Osaka Rule”.
The CAS Panel found in their Advisory Opinion the regulation to be valid because it was not a “sanction rule” but an “entry rule” that in effect only prevented athletes from competing in an “event” - the Olympic Games - which is wholly controlled by the IOC.
As support for its “entry rule” determination, the Panel pointed to previous IOC decisions to exclude or permit other groups from the Olympic Games, such as professionals. The Panel reasoned that the IOC was not issuing a “sanction” but was instead opting not to accept the registration of a group of athletes, those suspended for more than six months for doping, at the Olympic Games.
Therefore the Panel deems on 11 June 2009 that the IOC is entitled to submit concerned parties and person to the Decision of 27 June 2008 of the IOC Executive Board.
