ANTIDOPING LEGISLATION: DISADVANTAGES AND DIRECTIONS OF IMPROVEMENT

Abstract

The content of the concept of “doping” with an emphasis on the peculiarities of its normative definition is studied. The expediency of detailing normative definitions in terms of supplementing certain characteristics is indicated. The complexity of normative acts on combating and combating the “doping phenomenon” is discussed, and civil, administrative, and criminal aspects of relations in the field of prevention of the use and spread of doping in sports are characterized. It points to such a feature of international documents as the use of abstract, generalizing wording, which, on the one hand, make these documents “flexible” in use, because there is no need for constant change, but, on the other hand, leave room for manipulation. The necessity to change the approach of the domestic legislator to the issues of liability is substantiated, in particular, the expediency of introducing administrative liability for violating anti-doping legislation requirements and expanding the number of criminal offenses, as fixing anti-doping violations discredits not only the athlete's reputation but also the state he represents. There are inconveniences regarding the practical use of national regulations on anti-doping control and liability for anti-doping violations due to the large number of “references” to other acts and the use of general wording.