Är CAS kass? - Uppfyller idrottsskiljedomstolen Europakonventionens garantier om rätten till en rättvis rättegång?

Sammanfattning: The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) was established in the 1980s following an increased demand for an arbitration tribunal to handle all sports-related disputes. The Court of Arbitration for Sport was introduced and has since its inception delivered a large number of decisions within the world of sports. The subject of the paper is to describe how CAS operates as an institution and analyze whether the process before the arbitration court meets the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Selected criteria in Article 6 (1) ECHR have been discussed and analyzed in order to establish to what extent CAS actually meets the requirements. Article 6 (1) ECHR grants a right to judicial proceedings, including guarantees to protect the right to a fair trial. CAS operates as an arbitration court under Swiss law and must uphold the requirements set by ECHR. Article 6 (1) ECHR entitles everyone to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. During the years as an active arbitration court, CAS has been subject to some criticism. The criticism has mainly been focused on whether the process in CAS meets the requirements set for a fair trial in Article 6 (1) ECHR. A fair amount of CAS decisions have been challenged on procedural grounds to the Swiss federal tribunal (SFT) and a couple have reached all the way to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The essay concludes that CAS to some extent has procedural deficiencies in relation to Article 6 (1) ECHR. The examination more importantly gives evidence for how every time either SFT or ECtHR has directed criticism of the arbitral tribunal, CAS has been responsive and changed its rules. This indicates a willingness and flexibility to coordinate the process in order to maintain, as far as possible, the European Convention on Human Right’s guarantees to protect a fair trial.