Speed skater Claudia Pechstein has failed with a complaint against the International Court of Justice Cas because of its alleged lack of independence. In a judgment, the European Court of Human Rights did not denounce Cas's lack of independence and impartiality (application number 67474/10). Nevertheless, according to the Strasbourg judges, Pechstein is entitled to € 8,000 in compensation because the Cas did not grant her a public hearing. As a result, their right to a fair trial was violated.
Strasbourg was another station on Pechsteins soon after a decade of going through the legal bodies. The five-time Olympic champion had resisted in 2009 against the Cas in Lausanne against a two-year ban because of conspicuous blood values. The sports court confirmed the suspension, however.
Pechstein claims to have never doped, experts certify her an inherited blood anomaly as a reason for their fluctuating blood levels. For the World Association Isu, however, she is still a Doperin, and to this day Pechstein fights against it, claims compensation for the injustice suffered. At the Federal Constitutional Court, a lawsuit has been pending for two years. In Karlsruhe, too, they wanted to see what emerges from the Strasbourg case.
What was the criticism of Cas based on?
Pechstein saw her right to a fair trial violated. She justified her allegation, among other things, with the way in which the judges of the Cas are appointed. Furthermore, no public hearing was granted, contrary to her express wish. Here, the judges were right. There are always criticisms of the International Court of Sport. One of the main allegations is that it is not an independent arbitral tribunal because the institution is financed by sports federations. In mid-September, the topic was again boiled. A Belgian court ruled that the legal obligation to settle disputes between players, clubs and associations before the Cas was unlawful. The starting point was a complaint by the football club FC Seraing.
Why is the European Court of Human Rights responsible?
Based in Strasbourg, the ECtHR deals with fundamental rights violations of all kinds, such as ill-treatment in prison, deprivation of liberty or expropriation. Here, citizens can file a complaint against the state to which they accuse a violation of the Convention on Human Rights. In the case of the Strasbourg court, as in the case of Pechstein, the right to a fair trial is particularly frequent. Pechstein formally complains against Switzerland, where the Cas sits. The ECtHR is part of the Council of Europe, a 47-member state organization, including non-EU countries such as Russia, Ukraine and Turkey. The court has nothing to do with the EU.
Have there already been ECtHR judgments in sport policy issues?
Yes. In January, for example, the ECtHR strengthened the existing doping control system. According to the judges, doping investigators may oblige professional athletes to provide information about their whereabouts months in advance. The so-called Whereabout system does not violate their right to respect for privacy.