WDSF-Präsidium zu Sperren: Protokoll vom 21./22. Jan 2012


MoM--2012 (Link zum Thema "Sperren im ")

Als Betreiber eines berichtenden Blogs zum Tanzsport ist mir in Bezug auf die Thematik „Sperren im internationalen Tanzsport“ das Protokoll des WDSF aus seiner Präsidialsitzung vom 21./22. Jan. 2012 zugeleitet worden. Angesichts des inzwischen eingetretenen öffentlichen Interesses, dass sich u. a. in den internationalen Initiativen „Freedom 2 Dance“ und der geschlossenen Facebook-Gruppe des Deutschen Tänzerforums wieder spiegelt, wird der einschlägige Text hier – mit Hervorhebungen durch mich – veröffentlicht. Bis 2009 hat der WDSF solche Dokumente zum Teil selbst veröffentlicht (s.u.):


JANUARY 21 & 22, 2012
TIMETABLE OF MEETINGS: FROM 10:00 TO 19:00 on Saturday and 9:00 to 19:00


Mr Tay explained the history and system relating to the suspension of athletes after dancing in unregistered events. To date, athletes have been suspended or considered for suspension for dancing in several unregistered events including the London Ball, the Imperial Championships, “Freedom to Dance” in Singapore and London, Assen, the Paris event, the UK Championships and the Star Ball. In each case the first suspension has been for 6 months and a second suspension for 9 months.

ST asked what occurs for athletes who continue to breach the Athletes Code of Conduct and dance unregistered events?

The Presidium conducted a detailed discussion about the WDSF suspension policy.

[Editor’s Note: After the Presidium meeting the Managing Committee decided to seek legal advice from WDSF’s Swiss Lawyers on this matter prior to finalizing the policy.]

Based on that legal advice the President requested an email vote of the Presidium and the Presidium agreed that suspensions of athletes for dancing unregistered events would usually be for 6 months for a first offence, 9 months for a second offence, and 24 months for a third offence.

Based on that legal advice the Presidium’s policy is now as follows:

For each alleged violation, the athlete should have the opportunity to make representations (as per the standard letter); Any suspension ultimately imposed should result from a decision of the Presidium (which could be reached by email under art. 15 of the WDSF Statutes); We will not to codify or rigidly set the length of sanctions for a first violation or for a repeat offence; it would be preferable to retain some flexibility. In theory the Presidium should consider the specific circumstances of the case and any representations of the athlete before reaching a decision. A completely rigid system could be challenged more easily on the basis of proportionality or right to be heard.

[p. 12] Notwithstanding the above, it is not a problem to agree on guidelines or parameters for the sanctions. The sanctions envisaged by the guidelines could be imposed in the absence of exceptional mitigating circumstances.

In terms of the specific length of the sanctions in the guidelines, either of the proposals for the first three sanctions seems acceptable (i.e. either 6/12/24 months or 6/9/12 months), subject to the above considerations.

A permanent suspension for the fourth sanction could be justified in the absence of exceptional circumstances; it could therefore be included in the guidelines as a maximum (but perhaps not automatic) penalty for a fourth violation. Certainly, it would not be inconsistent per se with the Statutes or the Athletes’ Code. The Code states that even a first participation in a non-registered event is stated to be a serious infringement; additionally, the Code explicitly provides for the possibility of a permanent suspension in the event of recurring breaches of the Code.

In light of the above, we should perhaps consider how best to document the guidelines or parameters. This could be a Presidium working document or be explicitly integrated into the Athletes’ Code (in which case it could be included in the amendments concerning the extension of the suspension to national events). ]

The Presidium also agreed that the application of the suspension policy adopted by the Presidium regarding first, second and third offences of participating in unregistered competitions is delegated by the Presidium to the General Secretary.

ST discussed the case of Pavel Pashkov and Daniella Karagach. The Presidium agreed that if the athletes signed a letter of undertaking by January 31, 2012 the couple will not be suspended. If the undertaking is not received by that date then the couple will be suspended for 6 months beginning February 1, 2012 under the Athletes’ Code.


When WDSF suspends an athlete from WDSF competitions, what should WDSF do if his or her WDSF Member body does not accept to suspend that athlete for its national competitions?

The Presidium considered correspondence on this question from our Swiss lawyers.

The Presidium discussed the ramifications of suspensions of athletes under the Athletes‘ Code and agreed that it is the policy of this Presidium that if the WDSF Presidium suspends an athlete from competition under the Code, then the relevant WDSF Member body should suspend that athlete from competing in that country for the same period of time.

The Presidium also agreed that this matter would be considered by the AGM in June.


ST explained what motions would be required for the next AGM. (…)


Transparenz im WDSF?

Mehrere Male wurden von WDSF die Protokolle der Sitzungen des Präsidiums selbst veröffentlicht. Dies ist seit 2010 nun nicht mehr der Fall. Die daraus resultierende, fehlende Transparenz im Tanzsport trägt ggf. mit zu den gegenwärtigen hitzigen Diksussionen bei.

WDSF Presidium Meeting Minutes

The followinmg is the current Presidium Meeting’s Minute:

  • IDSF Presidium Meeting 2009

The following Presidium Meeting Minutes are shown for historical and archival purpose:

  • IDSF Presidium Meeting 2008
  • IDSF Presidium Meeting 2006

Quelle: worlddancesport.org | Minutes


Sie müssen angemeldet sein, um kommentieren zu können.