In the Netherlands, disciplinary proceedings relating to possible anti-doping rule violations are the responsibility of Doping Authority Netherlands and the sports associations. Doping Authority Netherlands determines in which cases proceedings should be initiated, and it has the competence to close files and to agree settlements in cases of anti-doping rule violations. If proceedings are initiated in cases of anti-doping rule violations, the disciplinary proceedings are conducted under the responsibility of the sports associations. The majority of sports associations have outsourced disciplinary proceedings to the Institute for Sports Law (ISR).

The position of Doping Authority Netherlands in disciplinary procedures

If a potential anti-doping rule violation is observed, Doping Authority Netherlands assesses whether there is sufficient evidence to prove that there has been a violation. If not, Doping Authority Netherlands may decide to close a case. If, in the opinion of Doping Authority Netherlands, there is sufficient evidence, a charge will, as a rule, be filed with the disciplinary committee of the sports association in question. In these cases, the sports association may file a charge but Doping Authority Netherlands can also file the charge itself. In the case of those sports associations who work with the ISR for doping procedures, Doping Authority Netherlands reports the doping case to the prosecutor of the ISR, who then files a charge against the athlete in question with the ISR’s judicial department.

The disciplinary and appeals committees of the ISR arrive at their decisions entirely independently of Doping Authority Netherlands. This does not mean that Doping Authority Netherlands is not closely involved in disciplinary proceedings relating to possible anti-doping rule violations. Under the World Anti-Doping Code and the National Doping Regulations (NDR), Doping Authority Netherlands is responsible for ensuring that the proper disciplinary handling of doping cases in the Netherlands takes place in accordance with the Code. The NDR describe and determine the various tasks incumbent upon Doping Authority Netherlands in disciplinary procedures. Those tasks involve, on the one hand, supporting and advising the disciplinary bodies with the interpretation and application of the doping regulations and, on the other, correcting decisions that do not comply with those regulations.

The support and advisory role is seen primarily in the contributions made by Doping Authority Netherlands during the disciplinary procedures: Doping Authority Netherlands is cognisant of the case, states written arguments in which all the relevant regulatory aspects are discussed and explained, and attends hearings at which it also speaks.

The corrective role is seen primarily in the right of appeal that Doping Authority Netherlands has in all doping cases, both with national appeals committees and with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne. Furthermore, Doping Authority Netherlands is, as pointed out above, competent to file a charge with the disciplinary body of an association independently without calling in the board of the association.

Doping Authority Netherlands did not submit any appeals to the CAS in 2022.

Reporting to WADA and International Sports Federations

Doping Authority Netherlands reports on the disciplinary handling of doping cases to WADA, the relevant international federation (IF) and, where appropriate, the foreign National Anti-Doping Organisation (NADO). These organisations are competent to appeal against decisions to close a case, settlement agreements, and decisions of disciplinary bodies.

Reporting takes the form of sending the decision of Doping Authority Netherlands, the settlement, or the decision of the disciplinary body (in full or as a summary) to the aforementioned organisations. In addition, supplementary questions are answered, case files provided, and documents uploaded to WADA’s database (ADAMS).

No decision was given at all in 2022 in a case in which an IF appealed against a decision made by a Dutch disciplinary body. In 2022, the CAS did rule on an appeal filed by WADA against a decision by Doping Authority Netherlands to close a doping case.

Reporting on disciplinary decisions

Table 4.1 lists all the decisions taken by Dutch disciplinary and appeals committees in doping cases in 2022 (inclusion depends upon the date of the decision), as well as the cases in which Doping Authority Netherlands decided to close a case or proposed a sanction that was accepted by the athlete.[1]

Table 4.1: Disciplinary decisions, decisions to close a case and sanction proposals accepted; situation when the annual report was closed
SportDescriptionYear of violationDecision
AthleticsLGD-4033 (Ligandrol)2020ISR Appeals Committee: four-year suspension.
BasketballEvasion / tampering2020CAS: two-year suspension.
Powerlifting2a-methyl-5a-androstan-3a-ol-17-one (metabolite of drostanolone)2021ISR disciplinary committee: four-year suspension.
PowerliftingEvasion2021Closure decision by Doping Authority Netherlands.
BoxingEvasion2022Closure decision by Doping Authority Netherlands.
RowingWhereabouts failures2022Settlement by Doping Authority Netherlands: two-year suspension.
Combat sportsTestosterone (of exogenous origin), androsterone (of exogenous origin), 5a-androstane-3a,17b-diol (of exogenous origin) and 5b-androstane-3a,17b-diol (of exogenous origin)2022Closure decision by Doping Authority Netherlands.
Combat sportsCarboxy-Tetrahydrocannabinol (Carboxy-THC)2022Closure decision by Doping Authority Netherlands.
Combat sports2a-methyl-5a-androstan-3a-ol-17-one (metabolite of drostanolone)2022Closure decision by Doping Authority Netherlands.
Combat sports2a-methyl-5a-androstan-3a-ol-17-one (metabolite of drostanolone), 19-Norandrosterone and 19-Noretiocholanolone2022Closure decision by Doping Authority Netherlands.
Combat sportsClenbuterol, Ligandrol (LGD-4033), GW501516, Methylhexanamine (4-methylhexan-2-amine)2022Closure decision by Doping Authority Netherlands.
  1. Sanction proposals (referred to in the NDR as settlement proposals) can involve both cases in which the standard or maximum sanction is proposed and cases in which, in line with the World Anti-Doping Code and the NDR, a reduced sanction is proposed.