EU Court Allowed Publishing Names of Athletes Caught Doping but Set an Important Restriction

The Court of the European Union has issued a decision that could significantly impact anti-doping practices across Europe. The judges affirmed that anti-doping authorities may disclose the names of athletes sanctioned for anti-doping rule violations, but such publication cannot be automatic. Before publishing this information, it is necessary to assess its genuine necessity in each specific instance.

This ruling was delivered by the Grand Chamber of the EU Court in a case initiated by four athletes identified in court documents as AR, YT, DI, and RN.

The plaintiffs challenged Austrian regulations that mandate anti-doping authorities to publish online the names of athletes, their sport, the nature of the violation, and the duration of their disqualification. They argued that this requirement contravenes the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

Three of the athletes had already been included in the public register, while for the fourth, YT, the publication of information regarding a four-year disqualification was imminent. Following the rejection of their complaints by the Austrian data protection authority, the Austrian Federal Administrative Court referred the matter to the EU Court for clarification.

The Court Recognised Publication as an Effective Anti-Doping Tool

The Court noted that disclosing sanctions can serve an important public function. Specifically, it helps deter other athletes from doping, ensures fair competition, and informs sponsors, employers, and sports event organisers that the athlete is suspended from participation.

According to the judges, anonymous notifications or informing only sports federations would not be as effective, particularly concerning professional athletes.

The decision underscores that publishing data about anti-doping rule violations is an appropriate means to achieve a socially important goal: preventing doping and ensuring the effectiveness of sanctions.

Automatic Disclosure Deemed Unlawful

However, the EU Court disagreed with the practice of automatically publishing data on all athletes who received disqualifications.

The Court pointed out that information posted online can remain accessible in search engines for many years after the disqualification period ends. Therefore, before publication, competent authorities must assess its necessity in that particular case.

During such an assessment, the following factors should be considered:

• The athlete's status and

  public profile;

• The severity of the violation;

• The duration the information will remain accessible online.

The Court specifically emphasised that even a lifetime disqualification does not mean the athlete's name can remain publicly accessible indefinitely after the actual end of their sports career.

GDPR Also Applies to the Anti-Doping System

The Court also rejected arguments that the activities of anti-doping authorities are not subject to GDPR because sports regulation is largely conducted at the national level.

The judges noted that exceptions to the application of European data protection law relate to areas such as national security, but not to the sports disciplinary system.

Moreover, the Court confirmed that an athlete has the right to appeal to the data protection authority before the information is published if publication is only planned.

Final Decision to be Made in Austria

The EU Court's decision means that anti-doping organisations can continue to publish information about athletes who have violated anti-doping rules. However, before each publication, they must conduct an individual assessment of its necessity and proportionality, as Courthouse News notes.

Concurrently, the final decision regarding the four athletes will be made by the Austrian Federal Administrative Court. It will determine whether the disclosure of each athlete's data meets the criteria established by the EU Court.

Additionally, the EU Court's decision may influence international anti-doping rules. Since the World Anti-Doping Code currently generally requires mandatory publication of sanctions, its provisions may be revised to align with the requirements for individual assessment of each case.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua, follow SUD.UA on Google News , and join us on VIBER, WhatsApp, Facebook and on Instagram to stay informed about the important events.