Access and Procedural Guarantees before Sports Tribunals in connection with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights

Pomen športnega prava iz leta v leto sunkovito narašča. Popularnost, vpliv ter finančni vidiki športa so Mednarodni olimpijski komite (v nadaljevanju: »MOK«) prisilili v ustanovitev Court of Arbitration for Sport (v nadaljevanju: »CAS«), ki naj bi kot vrhovno športno razsodišče odločalo o športnopravnih sporih na podlagi pravil športnih organizacij. V želji po enaki obravnavi vseh športnopravnih sporov je MOK odločanje o le teh želel prenesti iz pristojnosti nacionalnih sodišč na CAS. Jedro magistrske naloge obsega analizo procesnih jamstev v postopkih pred CAS v povezavi s pravico do poštenega sojenja, kot izhaja iz 6. člena Evropske konvencije o človekovih pravicah (v nadaljevanju: »EKČP«). Ker so podpisnice EKČP zgolj države, bom pojasnil tudi (ne)vezanost CAS na določbe EKČP. Nadalje bom obravnaval komponente pravice do poštenega sojenja, ki so pomembne tudi v arbitražnih postopkih. V magistrski nalogi pozornost namenim tudi vlogi Švicarskega zveznega sodišča (v nadaljevanju: »SFT«), ki je pristojno za presojo, ali je senat CAS spoštoval procesna jamstva zagotovljena s švicarskim nacionalnim pravom, med drugim tudi pravico do poštenega sojenja.The importance of sports law has been rapidly increasing in the past decade. Popularity, influence and financial aspects of sports have forced the International Olympic Committee to establish Court of Arbitration for Sport, an authority with jurisdiction over all sports-related legal disputes. The International Olympic Committee\u27s wish was to establish an authority independent of national courts’ jurisdiction and national legislation. In order to resolve all disputes equally the jurisdiction in sports-related disputes had to be moved from state courts to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. The main body of my thesis analyses procedural guarantees in proceedings before the CAS in connection with the right to a fair trial enshrined in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Due to the fact that only European countries can be signatories of the ECHR, the question whether the CAS is bound by it will be addressed. I will further examine all components of the right to a fair trial in the CAS\u27s arbitration procedures, subject to the monitoring jurisdiction of the Swiss Federal Tribunal, which examines whether the arbitration panel respected procedural public policy guarantees, including fair trial guarantees