兴奋剂违规基准罚的认定机制:从法律类推到一般条款——兼论故意与过失的规范化  

Finding of Basic Sanction of Anti-Doping:From the Presumption to the General Definition on the Normalization of the Elements of Intent and Negligence

作　　者：杨春然[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国石油大学(华东),山东青岛266580

出　　处：《天津体育学院学报》2017年第1期51-57,共7页Journal of Tianjin University of Sport

摘　　要：不同于2009年版的《世界反兴奋剂条例》,新条例直接将兴奋剂违规的基准罚建构在故意与过失的基础之上。故意性违规对应的基准罚是4年的禁赛,非故意性违规对应的基准罚是严厉批评、不禁赛和最高2年的禁赛。这样,如何判断故意性违规和过失性违规,则成为确认兴奋剂违规基准罚的关键。但是,故意和过失缺乏证据法上的可知性,以其为基础建构法律制度,则存在证明难的问题。为了解决故意和过失与证据法的冲突,新条例借助法律类推制度将故意和过失等主观要素客观化,使其适用直接成为事实判断,即,一旦运动员体内发现有非特定物质,即推定这是故意使用的结果;发现是特定物质的,则推定为非故意使用。但是,这种类推存在概念过宽和过窄的问题,为此,新条例又为故意和无(重大)过失规定了一般条款。对于故意而言,由于其核心是"欺诈",所以,条例规定中的故意仅仅是指直接故意,不包括间接故意。对于无(重大)过失而言,条例存在着特殊规定之间以及特殊规定与一般规定(定义)之间的竞合问题。就特殊规定之间的竞合,应当尊重运动员的选择;特殊规定与一般定义之间并不是特殊法与一般法的关系,而是其像故意的特殊规定与一般规定一样,是"烟"与"火"的关系,前者具有推定功能,后者具有解释、矫正和补充作用。In contrast with 2009 World Anti-doping Code, the Code of 2015 provided that the basic sanction of doping violation should be lied in the intentionand negligence of athletes. Due to the basic sanction of intentional violation being 4 years of ban and unintentional a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility,and two years Ineligibility, depending on the Athlete ＇ s or other person ＇ s degree of fault, whether the mens rea is intentional or unintentional is very importantfor determining the basic sanction. However, for the absence of knowability of the intention and negligence, it is very difficult to prove them as they are the keyelements of the systems. In order to resolve the conflicts between the intention or negligence and the rules of evidence, the new Code applied the theory of pre-sumption to make the subjective elements as the objective ones, which become the factual judgments. In other words, if the violation does not involve the speci-fied substances, it is the intentional doping;if it involves the specified substances, it suggests that it is not intentional doping. Nonetheless, the presumptionmay have the defect in definition of mens rea, namely too broader or too narrower than the fact. Therefore, the Code provided the general rules for intention indno（significant）negligence. For the former, it refers to as the direct intention, not including the indirect intention because the key element of it is fraud ; for thelatter, there is the question of overlapping between the special rules and general rules. As for the overlapping of special rules, it is respected for the athletes＇decision ; and the relationship between the special rules and general rules,likes the those of＂smoke and fire＂, not the special law and general law. The formerhas the role of presumption, and the latter has the roles of explanation, redress and supplementary.

关 键 词：反兴奋剂处罚 基准罚 无(重大)过失 故意 法律类推 

分 类 号：G811.1[文化科学—体育学]