Ministers’ Deputies

Information documents

CM/Inf(2004)43 (restricted) 22 November 2004

———————————————

Information on progress in UNESCO’s work on the draft international anti-doping convention

———————————————

Background and dates

1.         In March 2003, the World Anti-Doping Code was adopted by the Foundation Board of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) as the sole basis of the global struggle against doping. The world’s governments, most of which could not give legal approval to a document produced by an NGO, adopted the Copenhagen Declaration, which sets out their undertakings vis-à-vis the WADA and approves the principles contained in the Code. In the Declaration, the signatory states undertake to adopt an international legal instrument giving legal force to the states’ commitments under the Code before the Turin Winter Olympic Games in 2006 (see Article 22 of the Code).

2.         The sports movement, which has honoured its undertakings vis-à-vis the WADA with regard to the Code, has given us to understand that it is determined to put pressure on governments which fail to honour their commitments by the deadline, inter alia by imposing sanctions (e.g. refusing to allow them to stage certain competitions). However, in view of UNESCO’s work programme, the Convention will only be signed during the Turin Games at the earliest, as it is scheduled to be opened for signature in September 2005 and the Winter Games are in February 2006.

3.         The process of drawing up an international instrument against doping was initiated by UNESCO in January 2003 by means of a round table meeting of Sports Ministers. Meetings of experts followed in June, October and December 2003 and intergovernmental meetings were held in January and May 2004. The outcome of these meetings (in which the Council of Europe took an active part) was a draft International Convention, accompanied by a report by the Director General of UNESCO (MSL10(2004)Inf1). A written consultation procedure on the draft Convention has taken place (the final deadline for comments was
15 November 2004). The results of this consultation and possibly a revised draft Convention will be submitted for appraisal by the Ministers of Sport at the UNESCO Conference of Ministers of Sport (MINEPS IV) in Athens from 6 to 8 December 2004. A final intergovernmental meeting will be held in Paris from 10 to 14 January 2005. The Director General’s final report and the final draft of the International Convention are due to be sent to governments in February (seven months before the General Conference). In September 2005, the UNESCO General Conference should adopt the text, which will then be open for signature.

4.         Bearing in mind that an intergovernmental meeting is planned in January, it can be expected that the Conference of Ministers of Sport will not be so much an occasion on which to arrive at consensual agreements as one at which requirements will be set out. It is likely that in the time between the publication of the Director General’s report and the UNESCO General Conference, negotiations will continue to prepare the amendments which will be submitted to the General Conference.

The text

5.         The negotiations on the draft convention were marked by conflicts between the following opposing camps:

a.         advocates of an exacting Convention versus advocates of a Convention open to accession by the largest possible number of governments;

b.         advocates of measures to delegate responsibilities to the WADA versus advocates of the sovereign prerogatives of states;

c.         on an internal level, advocates of moves to delegate the anti-doping campaign to sporting or specialised bodies versus advocates of a more clear-cut role for the public authorities.

6.         While the texts of the Council of Europe Anti-Doping Convention (ETS 135) and the Additional Protocol thereto (ETS 188) did serve as a basis for the preliminary work of drawing up the UNESCO Convention, it was not possible to stick to the wording of the existing instruments after this initial phase.

There are still a number of questions which have not yet been resolved in the current draft. Particular bones of contention are:

-           the secretariat of the Conference of Parties;

-           the possibility of entering reservations;

-           and the clause on federal states.

7.         UNESCO is tempering its commitment. In the Executive Board, there were strong objections when it emerged that the education budget may be reduced to cover the cost of a secretariat or a control mechanism. For this reason, flexible proposals have been made (delegating the secretariat of the Convention to the WADA or financing the secretariat of the Conference of Parties through a fund financed by voluntary contributions, as provided for by the current draft).

8.         For various reasons, the enthusiasm of practically all the governments for the current draft is somewhat clouded. However, they all agree that there will have to be a result in the end and they all insist on being involved in the process.

9.         During the negotiations on the text, the Council of Europe (through the Deputy Secretary General, the Monitoring Group of the Anti-Doping Convention and the Advisory Group on Legal Issues, which took a special interest in the process) committed itself to:

a.         high standards (as close as possible to existing conventions);

b.         something more than self-appraisals to monitor the honouring of commitments;

c.         substantial international co-operation, co-ordinated by means of a Conference of Parties bringing together all the signatories and meeting once a year;

d.         a professional secretariat, forming part of UNESCO;

e.         the elimination of the possibility of conflicts of standards between existing instruments and the future Convention through a clause stipulating that, for States Parties both to the Council of Europe instruments and to the UNESCO Convention, the provisions of the UNESCO Convention should not prevail where standards differ (as UNESCO standards are generally less exacting).

Future prospects

10.        At all events, the member States which are parties to the existing convention wish to carry forward and enhance co-operation within the Council of Europe and consider that it will only be necessary to review the situation once the new Convention is fully operational. The 10th Conference of European Ministers responsible for Sport has reiterated this view just one month ago (see Appendix).

11.        The Council of Europe’s Monitoring Group on the Anti-Doping Convention shares the view that the two sets of instruments should exist side-by-side for the foreseeable future.

12.        This arrangement will only be viable for the Council of Europe’s instruments in the long term if they continue to assert themselves as a higher standard for states which really do have more advanced anti-doping policies and if the states in the Monitoring Group succeed in acting as a driving force within the UNESCO Convention organs. As things stand, this is an entirely realistic ambition.

Current priorities

13.        Co-ordination of the positions of the Council of Europe member States is crucial in the current strained climate of the negotiations on the draft International Convention. What is most important at the moment is that the comments made in response to the consultation launched by UNESCO and the opinions expressed at MINEPS IV are in keeping – insofar as possible – with the principles which have been approved collectively up until now. With this aim in mind, the Council of Europe has resolutely endeavoured:

a.         to document the member states’ views;

b.         to organise co-ordination meetings just before UNESCO meetings;

c.         to participate at political level (the Deputy Secretary General took part in the first intergovernmental meeting in January 2004 and is preparing to take part in MINEPS in December) and remain continually involved at technical and expert level;

d.         to prepare the draft resolution of the Conference of Ministers on this subject;

e.         to keep the Committee of Ministers and, in particular, its rapporteur group (GR-C) regularly informed of progress at UNESCO.

14.        At the same time, discussions have been launched with the UNESCO Secretariat with a view to setting up a partnership for the new instrument in the area of monitoring of commitments, particularly in Europe. For the Council of Europe, the aim will be to help to establish a credible monitoring system for the UNESCO Convention, which does not duplicate the Council system.

Appendix

Resolution II on

a. Progress within UNESCO on preparing a new international instrument against doping in sport;

b. Questions related to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)

(Adopted at the 10th Conference of European Ministers responsible for Sport (Budapest, 14 October 2004))

The European Ministers responsible for Sport, meeting in Budapest for their 10th Conference on
14 and 15 October 2004:

With regard to UNESCO:

Reaffirming their desire to realise quickly the important political commitments they have accepted by signing the Copenhagen Declaration on Anti-doping in Sport;

Thanking the Council of Europe for its essential contribution to helping governments to meet these commitments and other objectives in the fight against doping;

Noting with satisfaction the progress made by governments and sport organisations in anti-doping to date, in particular in relation to the recognition, governance and funding of the World Anti-Doping Agency, the acceptance of the World Anti-Doping Code, the development and implementation of the Council of Europe Anti-Doping Convention (ETS 135) and its Additional Protocol (ETS 188) and other intergovernmental co-operation on anti-doping;

Recognising the progress made within UNESCO on drafting a new international instrument against doping in sport and that this should enable many more governments worldwide to become involved in the anti-doping work in accordance with commonly agreed principles based on the World Anti-Doping Code;

Considering that the new international instrument against doping in sport should incorporate an effective monitoring system;

Stressing that the new international instrument should be in place before the Turin Winter Olympic Games in February 2006;

With regard to WADA:

Expressing their satisfaction with the way the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has developed since its creation in late 1999;

Stressing the importance, in accordance with the partnership nature of WADA, of striking a balance between the representatives of public authorities and those of the Olympic Movement in positions of leadership within WADA;

Resolve:

1.1        To co-operate closely on the new draft international instrument against doping in sport at UNESCO MINEPS IV Conference in Athens (6-8 December);

1.2        To seek to ensure that the standards under the new draft international instrument conform to the purposes of the World Anti-Doping Code;

1.3        To seek to ensure that the commitments under the new draft international instrument are as close as possible to the commitments made in the existing instruments, in order to promote compatibility between the two sets of instruments and to honour the existing commitments; 

1.4        To ensure that the Secretariat of the new draft instrument will be integrated in its parent organisation;

1.5          To support the implementation of an integrated solution for the monitoring of the commitments under the existing instruments and the future instrument;

1.6          To stress in this context the importance of good co-operation between the Council of Europe and UNESCO;

1.7        To clarify the relationship between the draft instrument and its annexes and the World Anti-Doping Code and its International Standards.

2.         To seek, in consultation and co-operation with other regions, to develop a policy for identifying the requirements that would enable the public authorities to put forward, at the right time, an agreed candidate for the Chair of the WADA Foundation Board;

Approve:

1.         The designation of Minister B. Mikkelsen (Denmark) being a representative of the public authorities as a candidate for the position of interim Vice-Chair of the Foundation Board (and Executive Committee) of WADA;

2.         The designation of Minister J.F. Lamour (France) as the representative of the European continent on the Executive Committee of WADA.

Take note of:

The designation of Minister B. Mikkelsen (Denmark) as representative of the European continent on the Foundation Board of WADA up until the end of 2005.