Abstract
Sports organisations generally have the burden of proving sports rule violations of sportspersons subject to their rules and regulations. Sports rule violations can generally be proven by any reliable means. A common approach taken by sports organisations in this respect is the implementation of so-called cooperation and reporting obligations embedded in their regulations. On this basis, athletes can be obliged to provide all kind of documentary evidence related or unrelated to the matter under investigation. This may cause problems to the privilege against self-incrimination of athletes. In addition, obtaining self-incriminating information in internal sports investigations carried out by private sports organisations can have legal and personal consequences that go well beyond the professional life of athletes. The integrity of sport has been characterised as a public interest due to the social impact of amateur and professional sports in most societies. As a consequence, negative sports-related conduct, such as doping or the manipulation of sports competitions, has been criminalised in various national laws to protect sporting values and preserve the role model function of athletes for young members of our society. This development has led to cooperation between sports organisations and law enforcement agencies, such as prosecutors and the police. Specifically, both collaborate in order to assist the other party’s investigations of sports rule violations and criminal offences, respectively. However, the exchange of intelligence between sports organisations and law enforcement may cause some legal tension. If the same misconduct of athletes leads to both internal sports investigations and criminal proceedings, athletes could be forced to provide self-incriminating information in internal sports organisations, which could then be subsequently transmitted to law enforcement. This system of intelligence gathering raises serious concerns regarding the procedural fairness thereof, keeping in mind the detrimental effects for sportspersons under investigations. A closer look is thus necessary to the legitimacy of the exchange of intelligence. Therefore, the aim of this article is to shed some light on this issue and clarify if and under what conditions internally obtained evidence can be passed on to law enforcement agencies.
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call