TENNIS

ANTI-DOPING PROGRAMME
2024

For information on For information regarding the

specific substances Tennis Anti-Doping Programme, contact:
or medications, and
for TUE
applications,
contact:

International Doping Tests & Nicole Sapstead

Management (IDTM) ITIA Senior Director, Anti-Doping
Blasieholmsgatan 2 A International Tennis Integrity Agency
111 48 Stockholm ITIA, Bank Lane
Sweden Roehampton
Tel: +46 8555 10 999 London, SW15 5XZ, UK
Fax: +46 8555 10 995 Tel: +44 203 819 0201
Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]
© International Tennis Integrity Agency
All rights reserved
2021
 CONTENTS

1. Introduction ............................................................................................... 2

2. Anti-Doping Rule Violations .................................................................... 12

3. Proof of doping ....................................................................................... 16

4. The Prohibited List .................................................................................. 19

5. Testing and investigations ...................................................................... 29

6. Analysis of Samples ............................................................................... 39

7. Results Management: responsibility, initial review, notice, Provisional

Suspensions, and Charge Letters .......................................................... 43

8. Results Management: proceedings before an Independent Tribunal ..... 66

9. Disqualification of results ........................................................................ 74

10. Ineligibility sanctions for individuals ........................................................ 75

11. Consequences for Teams ...................................................................... 94

12. Sanctions against National Associations ................................................ 94

13. Results Management: appeals ............................................................... 94

14. Confidentiality and reporting ................................................................. 101

15.Implementation of decisions ................................................................... 105

16. Statute of limitations ............................................................................. 107

17. Compliance reports .............................................................................. 107

18. Education ............................................................................................. 107

19. Interpretation of the Code ..................................................................... 107

Appendix One Definitions A1.1
Appendix Two Tennis Testing Protocols A2.1
Appendix Three The 2024 Prohibited List A3.1
Appendix Four International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions A4.1
Appendix Five International Standard for Testing and Investigations A5.1
Appendix Six International Standard for Results Management A6.1

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 1

1. Introduction

1.1 Implementation of the 2021 Code

1.1.1 The purpose of this 2024 Tennis Anti-Doping Programme

(Programme) is to maintain the integrity of tennis and to
protect the health and rights of Players.

1.1.2 The ITF is a Signatory to the World Anti-Doping Code (Code).

This Programme implements the mandatory provisions of the
2021 Code as part of the continuing efforts of the ITF, the ATP,
the WTA, and the Grand Slam Board to keep doping out of
tennis.

1.1.3 The Code and the International Standards (each as amended

from time to time) are integral parts of this Programme and will
prevail over this Programme in case of conflict.

1.1.4 This Programme must be interpreted in a manner that is

consistent with the Code and the International Standards (each
as amended from time to time). The Code and this Programme
must be interpreted as an independent and autonomous text
and not by reference to the existing law or statutes of any
Signatory or government. The comments annotating various
provisions of the Code, the International Standards, or this
Programme, are to be used to interpret the Programme.

1.1.5 Subject to Article 1.1.4, this Programme is governed by English

law. Subject always to the jurisdiction conferred on the
Independent Tribunal in Article 8.1 and on the CAS in Article
13 to determine charges brought for violation of the TADP and
certain related issues, any other claims or disputes (contractual
or otherwise) relating to or arising out of the TADP between (on
the one hand) Players, Player Support Personnel, and/or other
Persons who are subject to the TADP and (on the other hand)
the ITF, the ITIA, the ATP, the WTA, the Grand Slam
tournaments and/or Delegated Third Parties, are subject to the
exclusive jurisdiction of the English courts.

1.1.6 Unless otherwise stated, (a) terms in this Programme

beginning with capital letters are defined terms that have the
meaning given to them in Appendix One to this Programme;
and (b) references to Articles are to Articles of this Programme.

1.1.7 Except with respect to matters arising prior to the Effective

Date, the ITF has delegated all aspects of Doping Control and

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 2

 Education under this Programme to the ITIA, including (without
limitation) test distribution planning, Testing, collection of
whereabouts information, administration of TUEs, conduct of
investigations, Results Management, and the pursuit of alleged
Anti-Doping Rule Violations, including first instance hearings
and appeals. The ITIA has full authority and autonomy to
perform these delegated duties on behalf of the ITF, and will
do so in compliance with this Programme, the Code, and the
International Standards. The ITF will remain accountable to
WADA for such compliance.

1.1.8 The ITIA may further delegate any aspect(s) of Doping Control
and/or Education to another Delegated Third Party/Parties.
The ITIA will require the Delegated Third Party/Parties to
perform such aspects in compliance with this Programme, the
Code, and the International Standards. Any relevant reference
to the ITIA in this Programme encompasses any such
Delegated Third Party, where applicable and within the context
of the aforementioned delegation.

1.2 Application

This Programme applies to:

1.2.1 the ITF and any of its board members, directors, officers, and
employees who are involved in any aspect of Doping Control;

1.2.2 the ITIA and any of its board members, directors, officers, and
employees who are involved in any aspect of Doping Control;

1.2.3 each of the ATP, WTA, and Grand Slam Board, and any of their
respective board members, directors, officers, and employees
who are involved in any aspect of Doping Control;

1.2.4 Delegated Third Parties (and their employees) who are

involved in any aspect of Doping Control on behalf of the
ITF/ITIA;

1.2.5 each of the ITF's National Associations and any of their

respective board members, directors, officers, and employees
and Delegated Third Parties (and their employees) who are
involved in any aspect of Doping Control on their behalf;

1.2.6 the following Players, Player Support Personnel, and other

Persons:

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 3

 1.2.6.1 all Players and Player Support Personnel who are
members of or registered with the ITF, or any
National Association, or any member or affiliate
organisation of any National Association;

1.2.6.2 all Players entered in or participating in such capacity

in Events, Competitions, and/or other activities
organised, convened, authorised or recognised by
the ITF or any National Association or any member
or affiliate organisation of any National Association,
wherever held, and all Player Support Personnel
supporting such Players' participation;

1.2.6.3 all Players who have an ATP or WTA ranking

(including any 'protected' or 'special' ranking) in the
2024 calendar year; and

1.2.6.4 any other Player, Player Support Person or other

Person who, whether by virtue of an accreditation, a
licence or other contractual arrangement, or
otherwise, is subject to the authority of the ITF or the
ATP or WTA, or any National Association or any
member or affiliate organisation of any National
Association, including:

(a) any tournament director, official, owner,

operator, employee, agent, contractor or any
similarly situated person and ITF, ATP and WTA
staff providing services at any Covered Event
and any other person who receives
accreditation at a Covered Event at the request
of one of the above; and

(b) any management representative, agent, family

member, tournament guest, business associate
or other affiliate or associate of any Player, or
any other person who receives accreditation at
a Covered Event at the request of the Player or
any of the above persons.

1.2.7 Each of the Persons covered by Article 1.2 is deemed, as a

condition of their participation in the activities described in that
Article, to have agreed to be bound by this Programme, and to
have submitted to the authority of the ITIA to enforce this
Programme, including any Consequences for breach thereof,

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 4

 and to the jurisdiction of the hearing panels identified below to
hear and determine cases and appeals brought under this
Programme.

1.3 Core responsibilities under this Programme

1.3.1 It is the personal responsibility of each Player to:

1.3.1.1 be knowledgeable of and comply with this

Programme at all times;

1.3.1.2 be available for Sample collection at all times upon

request, whether In-Competition or Out-of-
Competition;

1.3.1.3 take responsibility for what they Use;

1.3.1.4 carry out research regarding any products or

substance that they intend to Use to ensure that
Using them will not constitute or result in an Anti-
Doping Rule Violation. Such research must, at a
minimum, include a reasonable internet search of:

(a) the name of the product or the substance;

(b) the ingredients/substances listed on the product

or substance label (noting that this may vary
depending on the country in which the product
or substance is sourced or where it was
manufactured); and

(c) any potentially relevant information revealed

through research of points (a) and (b);

1.3.1.5 inform medical personnel of their obligation not to

Use Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods;

1.3.1.6 ensure that any medical treatment they receive does

not violate this Programme;

1.3.1.7 disclose to the ITIA and their NADO any decision

(whether by a Signatory or non-Signatory) finding
that they infringed applicable anti-doping rules within
the previous ten years;

1.3.1.8 in accordance with Article 5.7.2, report to the ITIA

Senior Director, Anti-Doping any knowledge or

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 5

 suspicion that any Person may have committed an
Anti-Doping Rule Violation;

1.3.1.9 cooperate fully with the ITIA and any other Anti-
Doping Organisation conducting investigations into
possible Anti-Doping Rule Violations;

1.3.1.10 disclose the identity of their Player Support

Personnel upon request to the ITIA, their NADO,
and/or any other Anti-Doping Organisation with
authority over the Player; and

1.3.1.11 ensure that the ITIA is able to communicate with

them efficiently and reliably in relation to matters
arising under this Programme. To that end, each
Player is deemed to be immediately contactable at
the email address, postal address, and telephone
number that they have specified on any Doping
Control form that they complete, and it is the Player's
responsibility to complete such contact details (to be
referred to herein as the 'Player's Nominated
Address') as necessary to ensure that they are
immediately contactable at the Player's Nominated
Address. Any notice required to be given to the
Player under this Programme, if delivered by courier
service to the Player's Nominated Address, will be
deemed to have been received by the Player on the
date of delivery to such address reflected in the
confirmation of delivery provided by the courier
service company. At its discretion, as an alternative
to or in conjunction with such courier delivery, the
ITIA may use any other method of secure and
confidential communication available, including but
not limited to email and/or electronic notification via
the Tennis Anti-Doping Programme Portal; provided
that if the Player denies receipt of such notice, the
burden will be on the ITIA to prove that the Player did
receive it.

1.3.2 It is the personal responsibility of each Player Support Person

to:

1.3.2.1 be knowledgeable of and comply with this

Programme at all times;

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 6

 1.3.2.2 cooperate with Testing;

1.3.2.3 use their influence on Player values and behaviour to

foster anti-doping attitudes;

1.3.2.4 disclose to the ITIA and to their NADO any decision

(whether by a Signatory or non-Signatory) finding
that they infringed applicable anti-doping rules within
the previous ten years;

1.3.2.5 in accordance with Article 5.7.2, report to the ITIA

Senior Director, Anti-Doping any knowledge or
suspicion that any Person may have committed an
Anti-Doping Rule Violation;

1.3.2.6 cooperate fully with the ITIA and any other Anti-
Doping Organisation conducting investigations into
possible Anti-Doping Rule Violations; and

1.3.2.7 not Use or Possess any Prohibited Substance or

Prohibited Method without valid justification. Breach
of this prohibition will constitute a violation of Article
7.15.

1.3.3 Other Persons subject to this Programme must:

1.3.3.1 be knowledgeable of and comply with this

Programme at all times;

1.3.3.2 disclose to the ITIA and to their NADO any decision

(whether by a Signatory or non-Signatory) finding
that they infringed applicable anti-doping rules within
the previous ten years;

1.3.3.3 in accordance with Article 5.7.2, report to the ITIA

Senior Director, Anti-Doping any knowledge or
suspicion that any Person may have committed an
Anti-Doping Rule Violation; and

1.3.3.4 cooperate fully with the ITIA and any other Anti-
Doping Organisation conducting investigations into
possible Anti-Doping Rule Violations.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 7

1.4 Retirement

1.4.1 Each Player will continue to be bound by and required to

comply with this Programme, unless and until they give written
notice of their retirement to:

1.4.1.1 (in the case of Players who are International-Level

Players) the ITF, the ITIA, and the ATP or WTA (as
applicable); or

1.4.1.2 (in the case of Players who are not International-

Level Players) their National Association and their
NADO.

In each case, the Player will be deemed to have retired (and to

be no longer subject to the Programme) with effect from the
date given in the written notice of retirement or the date the
notice is received (whichever is later).

1.4.2 Each Player Support Person and other Person who is not a
Player will continue to be bound by and required to comply with
this Programme unless and until they no longer carry out the
activity (or are no longer bound by the arrangement) that
brought them within Article 1.2 in the first place.

1.4.3 Subject to Article 1.4.4, retired Players may not compete in any
Covered Event or national-level event unless they have (i)
given the ITF, the ITIA, and their NADO at least six months'
written notice of their intent to return to competition, and (ii)
made themselves available for Testing (including, if requested,
by providing whereabouts information) for a period of six
months before returning to competition. Any competitive results
obtained in violation of this Article 1.4.3 will be Disqualified,
unless the Player can establish that they could not have
reasonably known that the event they were participating in was
a Covered Event or national-level event.

1.4.4 WADA, in consultation with the ITIA and the Player's NADO,
may exempt a Player from the six-month written notice
requirement where the strict application of that requirement
would be unfair to the Player. WADA's decision to grant or not
to grant such exemption may be appealed under Article 13.

1.4.5 If a Player retires while subject to a period of Ineligibility, they

must give written notice of such retirement to the ITF and the
ITIA and (if the period of Ineligibility was not imposed under the

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 8

 Programme or a predecessor version) to the Anti-Doping
Organisation that imposed the period of Ineligibility. The Player
may not return to compete in a Covered Event or national-level
event unless the Player has (i) given six months' prior written
notice (or notice equivalent to the period of Ineligibility
remaining as of the date the Player retired, if that period was
longer than six months) to the ITF, the ITIA, and to their NADO
of their intent to return to competition, and (ii) made themselves
available for Testing (including, if requested, by providing
whereabouts information) for that notice period.

1.4.6 Where a Covered Event or national-level Event that will take

place after the applicable period set out in Article 1.4.3 or 1.4.5
has expired or has an entry deadline that falls during such
period, the Player may submit an application for entry in the
Event in accordance with that deadline, notwithstanding that at
the time of such application the applicable period has not yet
expired.

1.4.7 The ITF, the ITIA, relevant National Association, relevant

NADO, Independent Tribunal, and CAS (as applicable), will
continue to have jurisdiction under this Programme over a
Player in respect of matters taking place prior to the Player's
retirement, and over any other Person in respect of matters
taking place prior to the application of Article 1.4.2.

1.4.7.1 If such Player or other Person retires or ceases to be

subject to the Programme while subject to a Results
Management process, the ITIA or other Anti-Doping
Organisation conducting that Results Management
process retains authority to complete that process.

1.4.7.2 If such Player or other Person retires or ceases to be

subject to the Programme before any Results
Management process has begun, and the ITIA or
other Anti-Doping Organisation would have had
Results Management authority over them at the time
that they committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation,
the ITIA or other Anti-Doping Organisation retains
authority to conduct Results Management.

1.4.8 During any Results Management process conducted in

accordance with Article 1.4.7, the Player or other Person
involved is required to cooperate fully with the ITIA and any
other Anti-Doping Organisation conducting investigations into

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 9

 possible Anti-Doping Rule Violations committed prior to their
retirement, and will be liable for any Tampering they commit
during such Results Management process.

1.5 Effective Date

1.5.1 This Programme comes into full force and effect on 1 January
2024 (the 'Effective Date'), replacing the Tennis Anti-Doping
Programme that was in force prior to the Effective Date.

1.5.2 This Programme does not apply retroactively to matters arising

prior to the Effective Date. However:

1.5.2.1 Anti-Doping Rule Violations that took place prior to

the Effective Date, whether under predecessor
versions of the Programme and/or other relevant
rules, count as prior violations for purposes of
determining sanctions under Article 10 for further
Anti-Doping Rule Violations committed after the
Effective Date.

1.5.2.2 Any case that is pending as of the Effective Date, and

any case brought after the Effective Date based on
an Anti-Doping Rule Violation that allegedly occurred
prior to the Effective Date, will be governed by the
substantive anti-doping rules in effect at the time the
alleged Anti-Doping Rule Violation occurred, and not
by the substantive anti-doping rules set out in this
Programme (unless the hearing panel determines
that the principle of lex mitior appropriately applies
under the circumstances of the case), but the
procedural aspects of the case will be governed by
this Programme. For these purposes, the
retrospective periods in which prior violations can be
considered for purposes of multiple violations under
Article 10.9.5 and the statute of limitations in Article
16 are procedural rules, not substantive rules, and
should be applied retroactively (along with all of the
other procedural rules in this Programme), save that
the Article 16 statute of limitations will only apply if
the previously applicable statute of limitation period
(whether the original one or as extended by
subsequent rules) has not already expired by the
Effective Date.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 10

 1.5.2.3 Any Article 2.4 Whereabouts Failure (whether a
Filing Failure or a Missed Test) that took place prior
to the Effective Date may be relied upon as one of
the requisite elements of an Article 2.4 Anti-Doping
Rule Violation under this Programme.

1.5.2.4 Where a final decision finding that an Anti-Doping

Rule Violation has been committed and imposing a
period of Ineligibility is rendered prior to the Effective
Date, but the Player or other Person is still serving
the period of Ineligibility as of the Effective Date, the
Player or other Person may apply to the ITIA before
the period of Ineligibility has expired to reduce the
period of Ineligibility in light of a lex mitior in this
Programme. The ITIA’s decision on that application
may be appealed pursuant to Article 13.2.

1.5.2.5 For purposes of assessing the period of Ineligibility

for a second violation under Article 10.9.1, where the
sanction for the first violation was determined based
on rules in force prior to the Effective Date, the period
of Ineligibility that would have been imposed for that
first violation had this Programme been applicable at
that time will be used in Article 10.9.1.2 to help
determine the period of Ineligibility for the second
violation under Article 10.9.1.

1.6 Amendments

1.6.1 The Tennis Integrity Supervisory Board may amend this

Programme from time to time. Such amendments will come into
effect on the date specified by the Tennis Integrity Supervisory
Board.

1.6.2 Amendments to the Code, the Prohibited List, and any

International Standard will come into effect automatically in the
manner set out in the Code, and such amendments will be
binding upon all Persons who are subject to this Programme
without further formality.

1.6.3 Changes to the Prohibited List and Technical Documents

relating to substances or methods on the Prohibited List will not
be applied retroactively unless they specifically so provide.
However, when a substance or method is removed from the
Prohibited List, a Player or other Person currently serving a

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 11

 period of Ineligibility on account of an Anti-Doping Rule
Violation based on the former Prohibited Substance or
Prohibited Method may apply to the ITIA to consider a
reduction in the period of Ineligibility in light of the removal of
the substance or method from the Prohibited List.

2. Anti-Doping Rule Violations

Doping is defined as the occurrence of one or more of the following (each, an

Anti-Doping Rule Violation):

2.1 The presence of a Prohibited Substance or any of its Metabolites

or Markers in a Player's Sample, unless the Player establishes that
such presence is consistent with a TUE granted in accordance
with Article 4.4.

2.1.1 It is each Player's personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited

Substance enters their body. Players are responsible for any
Prohibited Substance or any of its Metabolites or Markers
found to be present in their Samples. Accordingly, it is not
necessary to demonstrate intent, Fault, Negligence, or knowing
Use on the Player's part in order to establish an Article 2.1 Anti-
Doping Rule Violation; nor is the Player's lack of intent, Fault,
Negligence or knowledge a defence to an assertion that an
Article 2.1 Anti-Doping Rule Violation has been committed.

2.1.2 Sufficient proof of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation under Article

2.1 is established by any of the following: (a) the presence of a
Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in the
Player's A Sample where the Player waives analysis of the B
Sample and the B Sample is not analysed; or (b) where
analysis of the Player's B Sample confirms the presence of the
Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found in the
Player's A Sample; or (c) where the Player's A or B Sample is
split into two parts, the presence of a Prohibited Substance or
its Metabolites or Markers in the first part of the split Sample
and the Player waives analysis of the confirmation part of the
split Sample or analysis of the confirmation part of the split
Sample confirms the presence of the Prohibited Substance or
its Metabolites or Markers found in the first part of the split
Sample.

2.1.3 Excepting those substances for which a Decision Limit is

specifically identified in the Prohibited List or a Technical
Document, the presence of any reported quantity of a

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 12

 Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in a Player's
Sample constitutes an Anti-Doping Rule Violation under Article
2.1, unless the Player establishes that such presence is
consistent with a TUE granted in accordance with Article 4.4.

2.1.4 As an exception to the general rule of Article 2.1, the Prohibited

List, International Standards or Technical Documents may
establish special criteria for reporting or the evaluation of
certain Prohibited Substances.

2.2 Use or Attempted Use by a Player of a Prohibited Substance or a

Prohibited Method, unless the Player establishes that such Use or
Attempted Use is consistent with a TUE granted in accordance
with Article 4.4.

2.2.1 It is each Player's personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited

Substance enters their body and that no Prohibited Method is
Used. Accordingly, it is not necessary to demonstrate intent,
Fault, Negligence, or knowing Use on the Player's part in order
to establish an Anti-Doping Rule Violation for Use of a
Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method under Article 2.2;
nor is the Player's lack of intent, Fault, Negligence or
knowledge a defence to a charge that an Anti-Doping Rule
Violation of Use has been committed under Article 2.2.

2.2.2 It is necessary to demonstrate intent on the Player's part in

order to establish an Anti-Doping Rule Violation of Attempted
Use.

2.2.3 The success or failure of the Use or Attempted Use of a

Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is not material. For
an Article 2.2 Anti-Doping Rule Violation to be committed, it is
sufficient that the Player Used or Attempted to Use the
Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.

2.2.4 Out-of-Competition Use of a Prohibited Substance that is only

prohibited In-Competition is not an Article 2.2 Anti-Doping Rule
Violation. However, if that substance (or any of its Metabolites
or Markers) is still present in a Sample collected In-
Competition, that is an Article 2.1 Anti-Doping Rule Violation.

2.3 A Player evading Sample collection; or refusing or failing to submit

to Sample collection without compelling justification after
notification by a duly authorised Person.

2.4 Whereabouts Failures by a Player.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 13

 Any combination of three Missed Tests and/or Filing Failures within a
12-month period by a Player in a Registered Testing Pool.

2.5 Tampering or Attempted Tampering with any part of Doping

Control by a Player or other Person.

2.6 Possession of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method by

a Player or a Player Support Person.

2.6.1 Possession by a Player In-Competition of any Prohibited

Substance or Prohibited Method, or Possession by a Player
Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any
Prohibited Method that is prohibited Out-of-Competition, unless
the Player establishes that such Possession is consistent with
a TUE granted in accordance with Article 4.4 or other
acceptable justification.

2.6.2 Possession by a Player Support Person In-Competition of any

Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method, or Possession by
a Player Support Person Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited
Substance or any Prohibited Method that is prohibited Out-of-
Competition in connection with a Player, Competition or
training, unless the Player Support Person establishes that
such Possession is consistent with a TUE granted to the Player
in accordance with Article 4.4 or other acceptable justification.

2.7 Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking in any Prohibited Substance

or Prohibited Method by a Player or other Person.

2.8 Administration or Attempted Administration by a Player or other

Person either to (a) any Player In-Competition of any Prohibited
Substance or Prohibited Method, or (b) any Player Out-of-
Competition of any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method
that is prohibited Out-of-Competition.

2.9 Complicity or Attempted complicity by a Player or other Person.

Assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, conspiring to commit, covering

up, or any other type of intentional complicity or Attempted complicity
involving an Anti-Doping Rule Violation, an Attempted Anti-Doping Rule
Violation, or a violation of Article 10.14.1 by another Person.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 14

2.10 Prohibited association by a Player or other Person.

2.10.1 Association by a Player or other Person subject to the authority

of an Anti-Doping Organisation in a professional or sport-
related capacity with any Player Support Person who:

2.10.1.1 if subject to the authority of an Anti-Doping

Organisation, is serving a period of Ineligibility; or

2.10.1.2 if not subject to the authority of an Anti-Doping

Organisation, and where Ineligibility has not been
addressed in a Results Management process
pursuant to this Programme or the Code, has been
convicted or found in a criminal, disciplinary or
professional proceeding to have engaged in conduct
that would have constituted a violation of Code-
compliant anti-doping rules if such rules had been
applicable to such Person. The disqualifying status
of such Person will be in force for the longer of (i) six
years from the criminal, professional or disciplinary
decision; and (ii) the duration of the criminal,
disciplinary or professional sanction imposed; or

2.10.1.3 is serving as a front or intermediary for an individual

described in Article 2.10.1.1 or 2.10.1.2.

2.10.2 To prove an Article 2.10 Anti-Doping Rule Violation, the ITIA or

other Anti-Doping Organisation must establish that the Player
or other Person knew of the Player Support Person’s
disqualifying status.

2.10.3 If the Player or other Person establishes either:

2.10.3.1 that their association with a Player Support Person

described in Article 2.10.1.1 or 2.10.1.2 is not in a
professional or sport-related capacity; or

2.10.3.2 that such association could not have been

reasonably avoided;

that will be a complete defence to the charge that the Player or

other Person has committed an Article 2.10 Anti-Doping Rule
Violation.

2.10.4 If the ITIA or other Anti-Doping Organisation becomes aware

of any Player Support Person who meets the criteria described

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 15

 in Articles 2.10.1.1, 2.10.1.2 or 2.10.1.3, it will submit that
information to WADA.

2.11 Acts by a Player or other Person to discourage or retaliate against

reporting to authorities.

2.11.1 Where such conduct does not constitute a violation of Article

2.5:

2.11.1.1 Any act that threatens or seeks to intimidate another

Person with the intent of discouraging the Person
from the good faith reporting of information that
relates to an alleged Anti-Doping Rule Violation or
alleged non-compliance with this Programme or the
Code to WADA, the ITIA, another Anti-Doping
Organisation, law enforcement, a regulatory or
professional disciplinary body, a hearing body, or a
Person conducting an investigation for WADA, the
ITIA, or another Anti-Doping Organisation.

2.11.1.2 Retaliation against a Person who has provided

evidence or information in good faith that relates to
an alleged Anti-Doping Rule Violation or alleged non-
compliance with this Programme or the Code to
WADA, the ITIA, another Anti-Doping Organisation,
law enforcement, a regulatory or professional
disciplinary body, a hearing body, or a Person
conducting an investigation for WADA, the ITIA, or
another Anti-Doping Organisation.

2.11.2 For purposes of Article 2.11, retaliation, threatening, and

intimidation include an act taken against such Person that lacks
a good faith basis or is a disproportionate response.

3. Proof of doping

3.1 Burdens and standards of proof

3.1.1 The ITIA will have the burden of establishing that an Anti-
Doping Rule Violation has occurred. The standard of proof will
be whether the ITIA has established the commission of the
Anti-Doping Rule Violation to the comfortable satisfaction of the
hearing panel, bearing in mind the seriousness of the allegation
that is made. This standard of proof in all cases is greater than
a mere balance of probability but less than proof beyond a
reasonable doubt.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 16

 3.1.2 Where this Programme places the burden of proof on the
Player or other Person alleged to have committed an Anti-
Doping Rule Violation to rebut a presumption or establish
specified facts or circumstances, then except as provided as in
Articles 3.2.4 and 3.2.5 the standard of proof will be by a
balance of probability.
[Comment to Article 3.1: In a case arising under Article 10.14.7, the ITIA will have
the burden of establishing that the Player or other Person has violated the prohibition
against participation during Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension to the same
‘comfortable satisfaction’ standard as is set out at Article 3.1.1].

3.2 Methods of establishing facts and presumptions

The following rules of proof apply in doping cases:

3.2.1 Facts related to Anti-Doping Rule Violations may be

established by any reliable means, including admissions.

3.2.2 Analytical methods or Decision Limits that have been approved

by WADA after consultation within the relevant scientific
community or that have been the subject of peer review will be
presumed to be scientifically valid. Any Player or other Person
seeking to challenge whether the conditions for such
presumption have been met or to rebut the presumption must
(as a condition precedent to any such challenge) first notify
WADA and explain the basis for their position. The hearing
panel, on its own initiative, may also inform WADA of any such
challenge or attempt to rebut the presumption. Within ten days
of WADA’s receipt of such notice and the case file related to
such challenge, WADA will also have the right to intervene as
a party, appear as amicus curiae, or otherwise provide
evidence in such proceeding. In cases before CAS, at WADA’s
request, the CAS panel will appoint an appropriate scientific
expert to assist the panel in its evaluation of the challenge.

3.2.3 Compliance with an International Standard (as opposed to an

alternative standard, practice or procedure) will be sufficient to
conclude that the procedures addressed by the International
Standard were performed properly.

3.2.4 WADA-accredited laboratories and other laboratories

approved by WADA are presumed to have conducted Sample
analysis and custodial procedures in compliance with the ISL.
The Player or other Person asserted to have committed an
Anti-Doping Rule Violation may rebut this presumption by

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 17

 establishing that a departure from the ISL occurred that could
reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding (or the
factual basis for any other Anti-Doping Rule Violation
asserted). Where the presumption is rebutted, the ITIA will
have the burden of establishing that such departure did not
cause the Adverse Analytical Finding (or the factual basis for
such other Anti-Doping Rule Violation).

3.2.5 Departures from any other International Standard, or other anti-

doping rule or policy set out in the Code or this Programme will
not invalidate analytical results or other evidence of an Anti-
Doping Rule Violation, and will not constitute a defence to an
Anti-Doping Rule Violation; but if the Player or other Person
establishes a departure from one of the specific International
Standards listed below, and further establishes that that
departure could reasonably have caused an Adverse Analytical
Finding or Adverse Passport Finding or a Whereabouts Failure
based on which an Anti-Doping Rule Violation is asserted, the
ITIA will have the burden of establishing that such departure
did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding or the
Whereabouts Failure:

3.2.5.1 A departure from the ISTI relating to Sample

collection or Sample handling that could reasonably
have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding based
on which the Anti-Doping Rule Violation is asserted,
in which case the ITIA will have the burden to
establish that such departure did not cause the
Adverse Analytical Finding.

3.2.5.2 A departure from the ISRM or ISTI relating to an

Adverse Passport Finding that could reasonably
have caused the Adverse Passport Finding based on
which an Anti-Doping Rule Violation is asserted, in
which case the ITIA will have the burden to establish
that such departure did not cause the Adverse
Passport Finding.

3.2.5.3 A departure from the ISRM relating to the

requirement to provide notice to the Player of the B
Sample opening that could reasonably have caused
the Adverse Analytical Finding based on which the
Anti-Doping Rule Violation is asserted, in which case
the ITIA will have the burden to establish that such

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 18

 departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical
Finding.

3.2.5.4 A departure from the ISRM relating to Player

notification that could reasonably have caused a
Whereabouts Failure based on which the Anti-
Doping Rule Violation is asserted, in which case the
ITIA will have the burden to establish that such
departure did not cause the Whereabouts Failure.

3.2.6 The facts established by a decision of a court or professional

disciplinary tribunal of competent jurisdiction that is not the
subject of a pending appeal will be irrebuttable evidence
against the Player or other Person to whom the decision
pertained of those facts, unless that Player or other Person
establishes that the decision violated principles of natural
justice.

3.2.7 The hearing panel in a hearing on an Anti-Doping Rule

Violation may draw an inference adverse to the Player or other
Person who is asserted to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule
Violation based on the Player's or other Person's refusal (a) to
respond to a Demand or other questions put to them as part of
an investigation; or (b) after a request made in a reasonable
time in advance of the hearing, to appear at the hearing (either
in person or telephonically as directed by the hearing panel)
and to answer questions put by the hearing panel or the ITIA.
[Comment to Article 3.2.7: The hearing panel may also draw an adverse
inference in cases involving Players or other Persons who have violated
the prohibition against participation during Ineligibility or Provisional
Suspension (Article 10.14.7)].

4. The Prohibited List

4.1 Incorporation of the Prohibited List

4.1.1 This Programme incorporates the Prohibited List, which is

published and revised by WADA as described in Code Article
4.1.

4.1.2 A copy of the Prohibited List is set out at Appendix Three to this
Programme. Unless provided otherwise in the Prohibited List
or a revision thereto, the Prohibited List and revisions thereto
will come into effect automatically under this Programme three
months after their publication by WADA on

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 19

 its website, without the need for any further action by the ITF
or the ITIA.

4.1.3 All Players and other Persons are bound by the Prohibited List
and any revisions thereto from the date they come into effect,
without further formality. It is the responsibility of all Players and
other Persons to be familiar with the most up-to-date version of
the Prohibited List and all revisions thereto.

4.1.4 Without prejudice to the last sentence of Article 4.1.3, the ITF
or the ITIA will take reasonable steps to publicise any
amendments made by WADA to the Prohibited List, and to
distribute the Prohibited List to National Associations. Each
National Association must in turn take reasonable steps to
distribute the Prohibited List to its members and constituents.

4.2 Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods identified on the

Prohibited List

4.2.1 Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods:

4.2.1.1 The Prohibited List identifies those substances and

methods that are prohibited at all times (i.e. both In-
Competition and Out-of-Competition) and those
substances and methods that are prohibited In-
Competition only.

4.2.1.2 Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods may

be included in the Prohibited List by general category
(e.g., anabolic agents) or by specific reference to a
particular substance or method.

4.2.1.3 As described in Code Article 4.2.1, WADA may

expand the Prohibited List for the sport of tennis.

4.2.1.4 WADA may also include additional substances or

methods that have the potential for abuse in the sport
of tennis, in the monitoring program described in
Code Article 4.5.

4.2.1.5 Players and other Persons are reminded that:

(a) Many Prohibited Substances may appear

(either as listed ingredients or otherwise, e.g.,
as unlisted contaminants) within supplements
and/or medications that may be available with

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 20

 or without a physician's prescription. Since
Players are strictly liable for any Prohibited
Substances present in Samples collected from
them (see Article 2.1.1), they are responsible for
ensuring that Prohibited Substances do not
enter or come to be present in their bodies by
any means and that Prohibited Methods are not
Used.

(b) There are often synonyms for substances that

are mentioned by name on the Prohibited List,
but not all of those synonyms are necessarily
included on the Prohibited List. In addition, the
Prohibited List is not a 'closed list' of Prohibited
Substances but instead also encompasses
substances that are not mentioned by name on
the Prohibited List but instead are incorporated
onto the Prohibited List by category and/or by
reference to 'substances with a similar chemical
structure or similar biological effect(s)'. As a
result, the fact that a particular substance does
not appear by name on the Prohibited List does
not mean that the substance is not a Prohibited
Substance. It is the Player's responsibility to
determine the status of the substance, e.g., by
contacting IDTM (via the contact details set out
in the inside front cover of the Programme).

4.2.2 Specified Substances or Specified Methods:

For purposes of this Programme, all Prohibited Substances will

be deemed to be 'Specified Substances' except as identified
on the Prohibited List. A Prohibited Method will not be
considered to be a 'Specified Method' unless it is specifically
identified as a Specific Method on the Prohibited List.

4.2.3 Substances of Abuse:

Certain Prohibited Substances are specifically classified on the

Prohibited List as 'Substances of Abuse' because they are
frequently abused in society outside of the context of sport.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 21

4.3 WADA's determination of the Prohibited List

WADA's determination of the Prohibited Substances and Prohibited

Methods that are (or will be) included on the Prohibited List, the
classification of substances into categories on the Prohibited List, the
classification of a substance as prohibited at all times or In-Competition
only, and the classification of a substance or method as a Specified
Substance, Specified Method, or Substance of Abuse, is final and not
subject to any challenge by a Player or other Person, including (without
limitation) any challenge based on an argument that the substance or
method is not a masking agent or does not have the potential to
enhance performance, represent a health risk, or violate the spirit of
sport.

4.4 Therapeutic Use Exemptions

4.4.1 The presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or

Markers, and/or the Use or Attempted Use, Possession, or
Administration or Attempted Administration of a Prohibited
Substance or Prohibited Method will not be considered an Anti-
Doping Rule Violation if it is consistent with the provisions of a
TUE granted to the Player in accordance with the ISTUE.

4.4.2 TUE applications:

4.4.2.1 Players who are International-Level Players must

apply to the ITIA for a TUE.

4.4.2.2 Unless otherwise specified by the ITIA, Players who

are not International-Level Players must apply to
their NADO for a TUE. If the NADO denies the
application, the Player may appeal exclusively to the
national-level appeal body described in Article
13.2.2.

4.4.3 TUE recognition:

4.4.3.1 If a Player has a TUE granted by their NADO

pursuant to Code Article 4.4 that they wish to have
recognised by the ITIA for the purposes of the
Programme, the Player must apply to the TUE
Committee for recognition of the TUE, in accordance
with the procedure set out in ISTUE Article 7. The
request must be accompanied by all of the
information specified in ISTUE Article 7, and the TUE

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 22

 Committee may require that further information be
provided as necessary.

4.4.3.2 If the TUE Committee agrees that the TUE granted

to the Player by their NADO meets the criteria set out
in the ISTUE, the ITIA will recognise it. If the TUE
Committee considers that the TUE does not meet
those criteria and so refuses to recognise it, the ITIA
will notify the Player and their NADO promptly, with
reasons. The Player and/or the NADO will have 21
days from such notification to refer the matter to
WADA for review.

4.4.3.3 If the matter is referred to WADA for review, the TUE

granted by the NADO remains valid for national-level
Competition and Out-of-Competition Testing (but is
not valid for International Events) pending WADA's
decision. If the matter is not referred to WADA for
review within the 21-day deadline, the Player's
NADO must determine whether the original TUE
granted by that NADO should nevertheless remain
valid for national-level Competition and Out-of-
Competition Testing (provided that the Player ceases
to be an International-Level Player and does not
participate in International Events). Pending the
NADO's decision, the TUE remains valid for national-
level Competition and Out-of-Competition Testing
but is not valid for International Events.

4.4.4 TUE application process:

4.4.4.1 As a general rule, Players must obtain a TUE prior to

the presence, Use or Attempted Use, Possession, or
Administration or Attempted Administration of a
Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.

4.4.4.2 If the Player does not already have a TUE granted by

their NADO for the substance or method in question,
the Player must apply directly to the TUE Committee
for a TUE as soon as the need arises, in accordance
with the procedure set out in ISTUE Article 6. The
request must be accompanied by all of the
information specified in ISTUE Article 6, and the TUE
Committee may require that further information be
provided as necessary.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 23

4.4.4.3 An application to the TUE Committee for the grant or
recognition of a TUE must be made as soon as
possible and in any event at least 30 days before the
Player's next Event, subject to Article 4.4.5
(retroactive TUEs).

4.4.4.4 The TUE Committee will promptly evaluate and

decide upon the application in accordance with the
relevant provisions of the ISTUE and any specific
ITIA protocols posted on the ITIA website, and
usually (i.e. unless exceptional circumstances apply)
within no more than 21 days of receipt of a complete
application. Where the application is made in a
reasonable time prior to an Event, the TUE
Committee must use its best endeavours to issue its
decision before the start of the Event.

4.4.4.5 The decision of the TUE Committee will be the final

decision of the ITIA, and may be appealed in
accordance with Article 4.4.7. All TUE Committee
decisions will be notified in writing to the Player by
the ITIA and made available by the ITIA to other Anti-
Doping Organisations and WADA via ADAMS in
accordance with ISTUE Article 5.

4.4.4.6 If the TUE Committee denies the Player's

application, the decision must include an explanation
of the reason(s) for the denial.

4.4.4.7 If the TUE Committee grants the Player's application:

(a) The ITIA will notify the Player and (via ADAMS)
their NADO.

(b) The decision must specify the dosage(s),

frequency, route, and duration of Administration
of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited
Method in question that the TUE Committee is
permitting, reflecting the clinical circumstances,
as well as any conditions imposed in connection
with the TUE.

(c) The TUE will be effective as of the date it is

granted (save where a retroactive TUE is
granted, in which case the TUE Committee will

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 24

 specify the applicable effective date in its
decision) and will have the duration specified by
the TUE Committee. The TUE may also be
granted subject to such conditions or
restrictions as the TUE Committee sees fit.

4.4.4.8 If the NADO considers that the TUE granted by the

ITIA does not meet the criteria set out in the ISTUE,
it has 21 days from such notification to refer the
matter to WADA for review. If the NADO refers the
matter to WADA for review, the TUE granted by the
ITIA remains valid for International Events and Out-
of-Competition Testing (but is not valid for national-
level Competition) pending WADA's decision. If the
NADO does not refer the matter to WADA for review,
the TUE granted by the ITIA becomes valid for
national-level Competition as well when the 21-day
review deadline expires.

4.4.4.9 A Player may not assume that their application for a

TUE (or for renewal or recognition of a TUE) will be
granted. Unless and until a Player receives notice in
writing of a decision granting or recognising a TUE,
the Player Uses the Prohibited Substance or
Prohibited Method in issue entirely at their own risk.

4.4.4.10 A Player who wishes to continue to Use the

Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method in
question beyond the period for which the TUE has
been granted must make a new application for a
further TUE.

4.4.4.11 Players are warned that TUEs granted by the ITIA

may not be automatically recognised by Major Event
Organisations (e.g., the IOC, for the Olympic
Games). In case of doubt, Players should contact the
ITIA Senior Director, Anti-Doping for advice.

4.4.4.12 Subject to the foregoing provisions of this Article 4.4,

a Player may not apply to more than one Anti-Doping
Organisation for a TUE.

4.4.4.13 The submission of false or misleadingly incomplete

information in support of a TUE application (including
but not limited to the failure to advise of the

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 25

 unsuccessful outcome of a prior application to
another Anti-Doping Organisation for such a TUE)
will constitute an Article 2.5 Anti-Doping Rule
Violation.

4.4.5 Retroactive TUE applications:

4.4.5.1 A TUE may only be granted retroactively in the

following limited circumstances:

(a) Where the Player applying for the TUE is not an

International-Level Player, or (where this
Programme is being applied at national level) is
not a National-Level Player, and that Player is
Using a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited
Method for therapeutic reasons.

(b) Where emergency treatment or urgent

treatment of a medical condition was necessary.

(c) Where there was insufficient time or opportunity

or other exceptional circumstances for the
Player to submit (or for the TUE Committee to
consider) an application for the TUE prior to
Sample collection.

(d) Where the Player Used Out-of-Competition, for

therapeutic reasons, a substance that is only
prohibited In-Competition.

(e) In exceptional circumstances where,

considering the purpose of the Code, it would be
manifestly unfair not to grant a retroactive TUE.

(i) For Players who are International-Level

Players or National-Level Players, the ITIA
(or the NADO, in the case of National-Level
Players) may grant a retroactive TUE
pursuant to this Article 4.4.5.1(e) only with
the prior approval of WADA, which WADA
may give or withhold as it sees fit.

(ii) For other Players, the ITIA does not have

to obtain WADA's advance approval, but
WADA may review and either agree with or

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 26

 reverse the ITIA’s grant of a retroactive
TUE pursuant to this Article 4.4.5.1(e) to
such Player.

(f) Any decision made by the ITIA or WADA to

grant or not grant a retroactive TUE or to
reverse a TUE granted pursuant to Article
4.4.5.1(e) may not be challenged either as a
defence to an assertion of an Anti-Doping Rule
Violation, or by way of appeal, or otherwise.

4.4.5.2 A Player must submit an application for a retroactive

TUE to the TUE Committee no later than five working
days after an Adverse Analytical Finding is reported
in respect of the Sample collected from that Player
(although the ITIA may extend this deadline upon
request by the Player for good cause shown). Any
such TUE application must be resolved before any
Adverse Analytical Finding, Atypical Finding, or
Adverse Passport Finding relating to that Player's
Sample is processed.

4.4.6 Expiration, withdrawal or reversal of a TUE:

4.4.6.1 A TUE granted pursuant to this Programme:

(a) will expire automatically at the end of any period

for which it was granted, without the need for
any further notice or other formality;

(b) will be cancelled if the Player does not promptly

comply with any requirements or conditions
imposed by the TUE Committee upon grant of
the TUE;

(c) may be withdrawn by the TUE Committee if it is

subsequently determined that the criteria for
grant of a TUE are not in fact met; or

(d) may be reversed on review by WADA or on

appeal.

4.4.6.2 The Player will not be subject to any Consequences

based on their Use or Possession or Administration
of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method in
question in accordance with the TUE prior to the

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 27

 effective date of expiry, cancellation, withdrawal, or
reversal of the TUE. The review pursuant to ISRM
Article 5.1.1.1 of an Adverse Analytical Finding that
is reported shortly after the date of TUE expiry,
cancellation, withdrawal or reversal will include
consideration of whether such finding is consistent
with Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited
Method prior to that date, in which event no Anti-
Doping Rule Violation will be asserted.

4.4.7 Review and appeals of TUE decisions:

4.4.7.1 Review by WADA

(a) WADA must review any decision made by the

ITIA not to recognise a TUE granted by a NADO
that is referred to WADA by the Player or the
Player's NADO. In addition, WADA must review
any decision by the ITIA to grant a TUE that is
referred to WADA by the Player's NADO.

(b) WADA may review any other TUE decisions at

any time, whether upon request by those
affected or on its own initiative.

(c) If the TUE decision being reviewed meets the

criteria set out in the ISTUE, WADA will not
interfere with it.

(d) If the TUE decision does not meet the criteria

set out in the ISTUE, WADA will reverse it. If
WADA reverses the grant of a TUE, that
reversal will not apply retroactively, but rather
only from the point that the Player receives
notice of the reversal. Therefore, the Player's
results obtained from the date that the TUE
came into effect until the date that the Player
receives notice of WADA's reversal of the grant
of the TUE will not be Disqualified, nor will the
Player be subject to any other Consequences
based on their Use or Possession of the
Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method in
question during such period.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 28

 4.4.8 Any decision of the TUE Committee that is not reviewed by
WADA, or that is reviewed by WADA but is not reversed upon
review, may be appealed by the Player and/or the Player's
NADO exclusively to CAS.

4.4.9 A decision by WADA to reverse a TUE decision may be

appealed by the Player, the Player's NADO, and/or the ITIA
exclusively to CAS.

4.4.10 A failure to render a decision within a reasonable time on a

properly submitted TUE application for grant/recognition of a
TUE or for review of a TUE decision will be considered a denial
of the application thus triggering the applicable review/appeal.

4.4.11 Until such time as a TUE decision pursuant to this Programme

has been reversed upon review by WADA or upon appeal, that
TUE decision will remain in full force and effect.

5. Testing and investigations

5.1 Purpose of Testing

5.1.1 Testing under this Programme will be conducted in conformity

with the ISTI and any specific protocols of the ITIA
supplementing that International Standard.

5.1.2 Testing will be undertaken to obtain analytical evidence as to

whether the Player has violated Article 2.1 (Presence of a
Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in a Player's
Sample) or Article 2.2 (Use or Attempted Use by a Player of a
Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method).

5.1.3 The ITIA will conduct test distribution planning and Testing as
required by the ISTI.

5.1.4 Where reasonably feasible, Testing will be coordinated by the

ITIA and other Anti-Doping Organisations through ADAMS in
order to maximise the effectiveness of the combined Testing
effort and to avoid unnecessary repetitive Testing.

5.2 Authority to test

5.2.1 Subject to the limitations for Event Testing set out in Article 5.3,
the ITIA (on behalf of the ITF) will have In-Competition and Out-
of-Competition Testing authority over all of the Players
specified in Article 1.2. For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 29

 this Programme limits the Testing authority given to the ITF
(and the ITIA by delegation) and other Anti-Doping
Organisations under Code Article 5.

5.2.2 Players (including those serving a period of Ineligibility) must

submit to Testing at any time or place upon request by or on
behalf of the ITIA or by or on behalf of any other Anti-Doping
Organisation with Testing authority over such Player.

5.2.3 For the avoidance of doubt, the ITIA may select Players for
Target Testing so long as such Target Testing is not used for
any purpose other than legitimate anti-doping purposes.

5.2.4 WADA will have In-Competition and Out-of-Competition

Testing authority as set out in Code Article 20.7.10.

5.2.5 If the ITIA delegates or contracts any part of Testing to a

NADO, either directly or through a National Association, that
NADO may collect additional Samples or direct the laboratory
to perform additional types of analysis at the NADO's expense.
If additional Samples are collected or additional types of
analysis are performed, the ITIA must be notified.

5.2.6 Save in exceptional and justifiable circumstances, all Testing

will take place without advance notice to the Player in question.

5.3 In-Competition Testing

5.3.1 Except as otherwise provided below, only a single organisation

will have authority to conduct Testing at Event Venues during
an Event Period.

5.3.1.1 At Covered Events, the ITIA (on behalf of the ITF) will
have authority to conduct Testing. The selection of
the Covered Events at which Testing is to take place
will be made by the ITIA, and will remain confidential
except to those Persons with a reasonable need to
know of such selection in order to facilitate such
Testing. The actual timing of the Testing at a selected
Event, and the selection of Players to be tested at
that Event, will be at the discretion of the ITIA.

5.3.1.2 At the request of the ITIA, any Testing during the

Event Period outside of the Event Venues must be
coordinated with the ITIA.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 30

 5.3.1.3 At national-level events, the NADO of the country in
which the Event is staged will have authority to
conduct Testing.

5.3.2 If any other Anti-Doping Organisation desires to conduct

Testing of Players at a Covered Event at the Event Venue
during the Event Period, the Anti-Doping Organisation must
first confer with the ITIA (on behalf of the ITF) to obtain
permission to conduct and coordinate such Testing. If the Anti-
Doping Organisation is not satisfied with the response from the
ITIA, in accordance with the procedures described in the ISTI
the Anti-Doping Organisation may ask WADA for permission to
conduct Testing and to determine how to coordinate such
Testing. WADA will not grant approval for such Testing before
consulting with and informing the ITIA. WADA’s decision will be
final and not subject to appeal. Unless otherwise provided in
the authorisation to conduct Testing, such Testing will be
considered to be Out-of-Competition Testing. Results
Management for any such Testing will be the responsibility of
the Anti-Doping Organisation initiating the Testing.

5.3.3 The following periods will be deemed ‘In-Competition

Periods’, and Samples collected during such a period will be
deemed to have been collected ‘In-Competition’ for purposes
of this Programme:

5.3.3.1 from 11:59 p.m. local time on the day before the first
match of the main draw (or of the qualifying draw, if
the Player is participating in the qualifying draw) of
the first Competition in which the Player is
participating in an Event;

5.3.3.2 through to the end of the Player’s last match (in any
Competition) in the Event and the Sample collection
process related to that match that is conducted
pursuant to notification of Testing given to the Player
no more than 60 minutes after the Player's last match
(120 minutes if the Player's last match in the Event is
the final match in the Competition in question); or

5.3.3.3 (where the Player is participating in the Event as a

nominated member of a team) through to the end of
the team’s last match in the Event and the Sample
collection process related to the team’s last match in
the Event that is conducted pursuant to notification of

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 31

 Testing given to the Player no more than 60 minutes
after the team's last match in the Event (120 minutes
if the team's last match in the Event is the final match
in the Competition in question); or

5.3.3.4 (where the Player withdraws from the Event after the
time noted at Article 5.3.3.1, whether before or after
playing in any match at the Event) until the end of any
Sample collection process conducted pursuant to
notification of Testing given to the Player no more
than 60 minutes after the Player has given notice of
such withdrawal to the official at the Event specified
in the Event rules. If so requested, the Player shall
remain at the Event Venue for that 60-minute period
to allow such notification to take place. If the Player’s
withdrawal is from a doubles Competition, their
doubles partner must also submit to Testing at the
same time if requested to do so and that Testing shall
also be In-Competition Testing.

5.3.4 If a Player withdraws or is defaulted from or ‘no shows’ at an

Event after the time noted at Article 5.3.3.1, and the Player
(and/or their doubles partner) cannot be given notification of
Testing within 60 minutes of the Event official being advised of
the withdrawal or default or ‘no show’ because the Player
(and/or their doubles partner) is no longer at the Event Venue,
the ITIA may collect a Sample from the Player (and/or their
doubles partner) subsequently, and any Sample collected
pursuant to the notification of Testing given to the Player (and/or
their doubles partner) within 12 hours of the time that the Player
(and/or their doubles partner) advised the Event official of their
withdrawal or ‘no show’ will be deemed to have been collected
In-Competition. The Player and/or their doubles partner
(whichever of them could not be located) may be required to
contribute to the cost of their respective subsequent Sample
collection in an amount up to US$5,000. In addition, the ITIA will
consider whether the Player and/or their doubles partner
(whichever of them could not be located) should be charged
with an Article 2.3 Anti-Doping Rule Violation.

5.4 Out-of-Competition Testing and Player whereabouts requirements

5.4.1 Any period that is not an In-Competition Period is an 'Out-of-

Competition' period for purposes of this Programme and the
Code.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 32

 5.4.1.1 Any Sample collected pursuant to a notification given
to a Player outside of an In-Competition Period will
be considered to have been collected Out-of-
Competition.

5.4.1.2 The ITIA may select any Player for Out-of-

Competition Testing, whether or not they have been
included in the International Registered Testing Pool.
The timing of such Out-of-Competition Testing will be
at the discretion of the ITIA. Decisions relating to
timing and selection of Players for Out-of-
Competition Testing will remain confidential except
to those with a reasonable need to know of them in
order to facilitate such Testing.

5.4.1.3 A reasonable effort will be made to avoid

inconvenience to a Player who is subjected to Out-
of-Competition Testing. However, the ITIA will not be
liable for any inconvenience or loss caused to the
Player as a result of such Testing.

5.4.2 International Registered Testing Pool:

5.4.2.1 The ITIA may from time to time designate any Player
or Players for inclusion in a pool of Players to be
known as the 'International Registered Testing
Pool'. Any Player designated for inclusion in (or
removed from) the International Registered Testing
Pool will be notified of such inclusion or removal in
accordance with ISTI Article 4.8.7.

5.4.2.2 A Player who is included in the International

Registered Testing Pool is required (in each case, in
accordance with ISTI Article 4.8):

(a) to advise the ITIA of their whereabouts on a

quarterly basis;

(b) to update that information as necessary, so that

it remains accurate and complete at all times;
and

(c) to make themselves available for Testing at

such whereabouts.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 33

5.4.2.3 In accordance with ISTI Article 4.8.8.4, a Player in
the International Registered Testing Pool is not
required to provide a 60-minute time-slot for dates
falling within the In-Competition Period of a Covered
Event in which the Player is scheduled to compete
('In-Competition Dates'). However:

(a) This does not apply to Events organised by a

Major Event Organisation. The Player must
continue to provide a 60-minute time-slot for all
dates falling within the In-Competition Periods
of those Events.

(b) In respect of Covered Events to which this

Article does apply, if circumstances change
such that dates that the Player has identified in
their whereabouts filing as In-Competition Dates
no longer qualify as such (for example, because
the Player withdraws or retires from or is
knocked out of a Covered Event), the Player
must update their whereabouts filing to provide
a 60-minute time-slot for each of the dates that
no longer qualifies as an In-Competition Date, in
accordance with ISTI Article 4.8.8.3. Failure to
do so will constitute a Filing Failure.

5.4.2.4 A Player will remain in the International Registered

Testing Pool and will continue to be subject to the
requirements of ISTI Article 4.8 unless and until:

(a) they retire from their sport in accordance with

Article 1.4; or

(b) the ITIA has informed them in writing that they

have been removed from the International
Registered Testing Pool.

5.4.2.5 For purposes of Article 2.4, a failure by a Player in

the International Registered Testing Pool to comply
with the requirements in ISTI Articles 4.8.8 and/or
4.8.9 will be deemed a Filing Failure or a Missed Test
where the conditions set out in Annex B of the ISRM
for declaring a Filing Failure or Missed Test are met.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 34

 5.4.2.6 The ITIA will make available through ADAMS a list
that identifies by name those Players that the ITIA
has included in the International Registered Testing
Pool. The ITIA will review and update as necessary
its criteria for including Players in the International
Registered Testing Pool, and will revise the
membership of that pool from time to time as
appropriate in accordance with the set criteria.

5.4.2.7 Where a Player is included in the International

Registered Testing Pool and in a National Registered
Testing Pool, the ITIA will be responsible for Results
Management in respect of any apparent
Whereabouts Failure by that Player, and the NADO
will be required to provide any necessary information
or other support required by the ITIA to carry out such
Results Management.

5.4.3 The ITIA may collect whereabouts information from Players

who are not included in the International Registered Testing
Pool. If it chooses to do so, a Player's failure to provide
complete and accurate whereabouts information on or before
the date required by the ITIA may result in the ITIA putting the
Player into the International Registered Testing Pool.

5.4.4 Whereabouts information relating to a Player will be shared

(through ADAMS) with WADA and other Anti-Doping
Organisations having authority to collect Samples from that
Player, will be maintained in strict confidence at all times, will
be used exclusively for purposes of Code Article 5.5, and will
be destroyed in accordance with the ISPPPI once it is no longer
relevant for those purposes.

5.5 ABP Testing

5.5.1 The ITIA will implement an ABP Programme in accordance with

the relevant International Standards.

5.5.2 The ITIA will designate one or more person(s) or entity to

administer and manage the ABP Programme on behalf of the
ITIA ('Athlete Passport Management Unit' or 'APMU'). The
ITIA will also appoint suitably qualified independent experts to
form the Expert Panel for purposes of the ABP Programme.

5.5.3 The ITIA will decide which Players will be selected for ABP

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 35

 Testing. The ITIA will also decide (consulting as appropriate
with the APMU and/or the Expert Panel, via the APMU) on the
timing of such Testing. The ITIA will also coordinate as
necessary with other competent Anti-Doping Organisations
carrying out ABP Testing in relation to any Player(s).

5.5.4 Samples that are intended to be part of the ABP Programme

will be collected, transported, and analysed in accordance with
the relevant International Standards.

5.5.5 The data arising from analysis of such Samples will be

processed and reviewed to identify Atypical Passport Findings
that warrant referral to an Expert Panel, in accordance with the
relevant International Standards.

5.6 Independent Observer Program

The ITF and the organising committees for Covered Events, as well as
National Associations and the organising committees for national-level
events, will authorise and facilitate the Independent Observer Program
at such events where so requested by WADA.

5.7 Investigations and intelligence gathering

5.7.1 In addition to conducting the Testing, the ITIA has the power to
gather anti-doping intelligence and conduct investigations in
accordance with the requirements of the Code and the ISTI into
matters that may evidence or lead to the discovery of evidence
of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation. Such investigations may be
conducted in conjunction with, and/or information obtained in
such investigations may be shared with, other Signatories
(e.g., if the information relates to Players or other Persons
under their authority) and/or other relevant authorities (e.g., if
the information suggests the possible commission of a crime or
regulatory offence or breach of other rules of conduct), and/or
(where the information may evidence a breach of Section D of
the Tennis Anti-Corruption Program) it may be used by the ITIA
in furtherance of investigating such breach in accordance with
the procedures set out in Section F of the Tennis Anti-
Corruption Program, provided that the information is relevant
to the offence or breach in question and the disclosure of any
Personal Information (as defined in the ISPPPI) complies with
ISPPPI Article 8. The ITIA may stay its own anti-doping
investigation pending the outcome of

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 36

 investigations being conducted by other Signatories and/or
other relevant authorities.

5.7.2 Where a Player or other Person knows or suspects that any

other Person has committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation, it
is the obligation of that Player/Person to report such knowledge
or suspicion to the ITIA Senior Director, Anti-Doping as soon
as possible. The Player/Person then has a continuing
obligation to report any new knowledge or suspicion regarding
any Anti-Doping Rule Violation to the ITIA Senior Director, Anti-
Doping, even if their prior knowledge or suspicion has already
been reported. If the Player or Person refuses or fails to report
in accordance with this Article without compelling justification,
Article 7.15 will apply.

5.7.3 Players and other Persons must cooperate fully with

investigations conducted pursuant to this Article 5.7. If a Player
or Person refuses or fails to do so without compelling
justification, Article 7.15 will apply). In particular (but without
limitation):

5.7.3.1 The ITIA Senior Director, Anti-Doping may make a

written demand to a Player or other Person
('Demand') to provide to the ITIA Senior Director,
Anti-Doping any object or information that may
evidence or lead to the discovery of evidence of an
Anti-Doping Rule Violation, including (without
limitation) requiring the Player or other Person (i) to
attend an interview and/or to provide a written
statement setting forth their knowledge of the
relevant facts and circumstances, (ii) to furnish to the
ITIA personal devices that store electronic
information (including mobile telephone(s), tablets,
computers, and/or hard drives) so that the ITIA may
copy and/or download data and/or other information
from those devices that it reasonably believes may
be relevant to the investigation, (iii) to provide the
ITIA with access to any social media accounts and
data accessed via cloud services by the Player or
other Person (including provision of user names and
passwords), and/or (iv) to furnish to the ITIA hard
copy or electronic records that it reasonably believes
may be relevant to the investigation (including,
without limitation, itemised telephone billing
statements, text of messages received and sent by

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 37

 SMS or WhatsApp or any other messaging service,
banking statements, cryptocurrency wallets,
transaction histories for any money transfer service
or e-wallet, and internet service records). The Player
or other Person must furnish such object(s) and
information immediately, where practicable to do so,
or within such other deadline as may be specified by
the ITIA Senior Director, Anti-Doping. The Player or
other Person subject to a Demand acknowledges
and agrees that considering the large volume of data
on some personal devices, the ITIA’s examination
and extraction of information may take several hours,
and that the duration of the extraction process (no
matter how long) will not provide a basis to object to
the immediate compliance with a Demand. Any
information furnished to the ITIA Senior Director,
Anti-Doping shall be (1) used by the ITIA solely for
the purposes of investigating and/or bringing
proceedings relating to an Anti-Doping Rule Violation
and/or as otherwise set out in Article 5.7.1; and (2)
kept confidential except when it becomes necessary
to disclose such information to further the
investigation of and/or to bring proceedings relating
to an Anti-Doping Rule Violation, or when such
information is reported to other Signatories and/or
other relevant authorities in accordance with Article
5.7.1.
[Comment to Article 5.7.3.1: Where a Player or other Person
provides objects and/or information to the ITIA pursuant to
Article 5.7.3.1 that may evidence or lead to the discovery of
evidence of one or more Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s) by one
or more other Persons, the ITIA will not reveal to third parties
the identity of the Player or other Person who has furnished
the objects and/or information unless absolutely necessary to
enable the ITIA to pursue the investigation of, and/or to bring
proceedings in relation to, the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s), or
to enable other Signatories or other relevant authorities to
pursue the investigation or prosecution of other offences or
rule breaches in accordance with Article 5.7.1. Otherwise, the
ITIA will use all reasonable endeavours only to use the objects
and information provided in a manner that does not reveal the
identity of that Player or other Person.]

5.7.3.2 Each Player and other Person waives and forfeits

any rights, defences, and privileges provided by any
law in any jurisdiction to withhold objects and/or

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 38

 information requested in a Demand. If a Player or
other Person refuses or fails to produce such objects
and/or information, then (a) if disciplinary
proceedings are brought against them under Article
7.15, or (b) if the Review Board confirms, in
accordance with Article 7.9, that there is a good faith
basis for the Demand, the eligibility of the Player or
other Person to compete in Covered Events (or, in
the case of a Player Support Person, to assist
Players participating in Covered Events) may be
withdrawn, and they may be denied credentials and
access to Covered Events, pending compliance with
the Demand.

5.7.4 If the Player or other Person subverts or Attempts to subvert

the investigation process (e.g., by providing false, misleading
or incomplete information, and/or by destroying potential
evidence), proceedings may be brought against them for
violation of Article 2.5 (Tampering or Attempted Tampering).

5.7.5 Where, as the result of an investigation under this Article 5.7,

the ITIA forms the view that a Player or other Person has a
case to answer for commission of an Anti-Doping Rule
Violation, the ITIA will refer the matter to the Review Board, to
be dealt with as set out in Article 7.8.

5.7.6 The ITIA will keep WADA informed of its investigations in

accordance with the requirements of the ISTI, including
advising WADA where it decides following investigation not to
assert that a Player or other Person has committed an Anti-
Doping Rule Violation. That decision may be appealed
pursuant to Article 13.

6. Analysis of Samples

Samples will be analysed in accordance with the following principles:

6.1 Purpose of analysis of Samples and data

6.1.1 Samples and related analytical data or Doping Control

information will be analysed (a) to detect the presence of (or to
detect evidence of Use of) Prohibited Substances (and/or its
Metabolites or Markers) and Prohibited Methods and other
substances as may be directed by WADA pursuant to the
monitoring program described in Code Article 4.5; (b) to assist

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 39

 the ITIA in profiling relevant parameters in a Player's urine,
blood or other matrix, including for DNA or genomic profiling;
and/or (c) for any other legitimate anti-doping purpose.

6.1.2 As between the Player and the ITIA, Samples provided by a

Player under this Programme are the property of the ITIA, and
the ITIA is entitled (subject to Article 6.3) to determine all
matters regarding the analysis and disposal of such Samples.

6.2 Use of accredited/approved laboratories and other laboratories

6.2.1 For purposes of establishing an Adverse Analytical Finding

under Article 2.1, the ITIA will send Samples for analysis only
to WADA-accredited laboratories or laboratories otherwise
approved by WADA. The choice of such laboratory will be
determined exclusively by the ITIA.

6.2.2 As provided in Article 3.2.1, facts related to Anti-Doping Rule

Violations may be established by any reliable means. This
would include, for example, reliable laboratory or other forensic
testing conducted outside of WADA-accredited or approved
laboratories.

6.3 Research on Samples and related data

6.3.1 Samples, related analytical data, and Doping Control

information may be used for anti-doping research purposes.
However, no Sample may be used for research without the
Player's written consent. Samples and related analytical data
or Doping Control information that are used for research
purposes will first be processed in such a manner as to prevent
Samples and related analytical data or Doping Control
information being traced back to a particular Player.

6.3.2 Any research involving Samples and related analytical data or

Doping Control information must adhere to the principles set
out in Code Article 19.

6.3.3 Samples, related analytical data, and Doping Control

information may also be used for non-research purposes, such
as method development or to establish reference populations,
provided they are first processed in such a manner as to
prevent them being traced back to the Player.

6.4 Standards for Sample analysis and reporting

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 40

 6.4.1 Laboratories will analyse Samples and report the results of
such analysis in accordance with the Code, the ISL, the ISTI,
and Technical Documents in force at the time of analysis.

6.4.2 Laboratories may at their own expense analyse Samples for

Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods not included on
the standard Sample analysis menu or otherwise requested by
the ITIA. Results from any such analysis must be reported to
the ITIA in the same manner as the other results of analysis of
the Samples in question, and will have the same validity as
those other results.

6.4.3 Any Adverse Analytical Finding, Atypical Finding, or Adverse

Passport Finding reported by the laboratory in respect of a
Sample collected under this Programme will be dealt with in
accordance with the ISL, ISRM, and Article 7.

6.4.4 Subject to Articles 5.3.4 and 7.11.6, the ITIA will pay the costs
of collection and analysis of Samples under this Programme.

6.5 Further analysis of a Sample prior to or during Results

Management

There is no limitation on the authority of a laboratory to conduct repeat

or additional analysis on a Sample prior to the time the ITIA notifies a
Player that the Sample is the basis of an Article 2.1 Anti-Doping Rule
Violation charge. If the ITIA wishes to conduct further analyses on that
Sample after the Player has been sent formal notice of such charge, it
may do so with the consent of the Player or else with the approval of
the panel hearing the case against the Player.

6.6 Further analysis of a Sample after it has been reported as negative

or has otherwise not resulted in an Anti-Doping Rule Violation
charge

A Sample that has been reported as negative or has otherwise not

resulted in a charge may be stored and subjected to further analyses
for the purposes described in Article 6.2 at any time exclusively at the
direction of the ITIA (where it is responsible for Results Management in
respect of that Sample), the Anti-Doping Organisation that initiated and
directed Sample collection (if not the ITIA), or WADA. Any other Anti-
Doping Organisation with authority to test the Player that wishes to
conduct further analysis on a stored Sample may do so with the
permission of the ITIA (where it is responsible for Results Management
in respect of that Sample), the Anti-Doping Organisation that initiated

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 41

 and directed Sample collection (if not the ITIA), or WADA, and will be
responsible for any follow-up Results Management. Any Sample
storage or further analysis initiated by WADA, the ITIA, or another Anti-
Doping Organisation will be at (respectively) WADA's, the ITIA’s or
other Anti-Doping Organisation's expense. The circumstances and
conditions for storage and further analysis of Samples must comply with
the requirements of the ISL.

6.7 Split of A or B Sample

Where WADA, the ITIA, other Anti-Doping Organisation with Results

Management authority, and/or a WADA-accredited laboratory (with
approval from WADA or the ITIA or the other Anti-Doping Organisation
with Results Management authority) wishes to split an A or B Sample in
order to use the first part of the split Sample for an A Sample analysis
and the second part of the split Sample for confirmation, the applicable
procedures in the ISL must be followed.

6.8 WADA’s right to take possession of Samples and data

6.8.1 WADA may, in its sole discretion at any time, with or without
prior notice, take physical possession of any Sample and
related analytical data or information in the possession of a
laboratory or Anti-Doping Organisation. Upon request by
WADA, the laboratory or Anti-Doping Organisation in
possession of the Sample or data must immediately grant
access to and enable WADA to take physical possession of the
Sample or data. If WADA has not provided prior notice to the
laboratory or Anti-Doping Organisation before taking
possession of a Sample or data, it must provide such notice to
the laboratory and Anti-Doping Organisation within a
reasonable time after taking possession.

6.8.2 After analysis and any investigation of a seized Sample or data,

if a potential Anti-Doping Rule Violation is discovered WADA
may direct another Anti-Doping Organisation with authority to
test the Player to assume Results Management responsibility
for the Sample or data.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 42

7. Results Management: responsibility, initial review, notice,
Provisional Suspensions, and Charge Letters

7.1 Incorporation of the ISRM

This Programme incorporates the ISRM, as amended from time to time.

The ISRM is therefore binding on all Players and other Persons in the
same way that this Programme is binding on them.

7.2 Results Management responsibility

7.2.1 The circumstances in which the ITIA (on behalf of the ITF) will
take responsibility for conducting Results Management in
respect of Anti-Doping Rule Violations involving Players and
other Persons will be determined by reference to and in
accordance with Code Article 7, the ISRM, and this Article 7.2.

7.2.2 The ITIA (on behalf of the ITF) will conduct Results
Management and the investigation of potential Anti-Doping
Rule Violations in accordance with Code Article 7, the ISRM,
and this Article 7.2.

7.2.3 Without prejudice to the generality of Article 7.2.1, the ITIA will
have Results Management authority under this Programme:

7.2.3.1 where the conduct in question was identified as a

result of Testing initiated and directed by the ITIA
pursuant to this Programme or otherwise arose in
relation to this Programme;

7.2.3.2 where the conduct in question was identified as a

result of Testing conducted pursuant to other
applicable rules or otherwise arose in relation to
those other rules, and the ITIA agrees with the body
that issued such rules that the ITIA will take
jurisdiction over the matter, or the ITIA agrees that it
is otherwise appropriate in all of the circumstances
for the ITIA to take jurisdiction over the matter;

7.2.3.3 where the conduct in question was identified by

means other than Testing, and the ITIA was the first
Anti-Doping Organisation to send an Article 7.10
Notice to the Player or other Person of the potential
Anti-Doping Rule Violation; and

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 43

 7.2.3.4 in relation to an Article 2.4 Anti-Doping Rule
Violation, where the Player in question is in the
International Registered Testing Pool.

7.2.4 Where a Player commits an Anti-Doping Rule Violation at the

Olympic Games, the International Olympic Committee will
determine at least the question of Disqualification from the
Olympic Games. Where a Player commits an Anti-Doping Rule
Violation at the Paralympic Games, the International
Paralympic Committee will determine at least the question of
Disqualification from the Paralympic Games. In each case, if
the question of further Consequences, if any, to be imposed in
relation to such Anti-Doping Rule Violation is not determined
by the International Olympic Committee or the International
Paralympic Committee (as applicable), it will be determined in
accordance with this Programme.

7.2.5 Unless otherwise agreed by the ITIA, where another Anti-

Doping Organisation tests a Player under its own rules, and
that test results in an Adverse Analytical Finding, or if that Anti-
Doping Organisation uncovers or receives other evidence of an
Anti-Doping Rule Violation by a Player or other Person, then
(save for cases involving Whereabouts Failures where the ITIA
has Results Management) it will be the responsibility of that
Anti-Doping Organisation to investigate and pursue the matter,
including bringing proceedings against the Player or other
Person (if appropriate) under its rules, failing which the ITIA
may take responsibility over the matter.

7.2.6 Any dispute between the ITIA and another Anti-Doping

Organisation over which organisation has Results
Management authority in respect of a particular matter will be
settled by WADA in accordance with Code Article 7.

7.2.7 The ITIA delegates responsibility for Results Management to

the National Association (or its NADO) in respect of conduct
that was identified as a result of Testing or investigations
initiated and directed by the National Association or the NADO
(as applicable). The results of all Testing conducted on behalf
of the National Association must be reported to the ITIA and to
WADA within 14 days of the conclusion of the National
Association's process. Any apparent Anti-Doping Rule
Violation by a Player who is affiliated to that National
Association must be promptly referred to an appropriate

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 44

 hearing panel established pursuant to the rules of the National
Association and in accordance with Code Article 20.3.2.

7.3 Review and notification regarding potential Anti-doping Rule

Violations

7.3.1 Where it takes responsibility for Results Management, the ITIA

will carry out the review and notification of any potential Anti-
Doping Rule Violation in accordance with the ISRM and this
Article 7.

7.3.2 Review Board:

7.3.2.1 The ITIA may (at its sole discretion) submit any
review required by the ISRM (other than those
reserved for an Expert Panel) to a Review Board.

7.3.2.2 Where a matter is referred to the Review Board

under this Programme, the Review Board will carry
out such review in accordance with the ISRM and this
Programme.

7.3.2.3 Composition:

(a) For the review of Adverse Analytical Findings,

Atypical Findings, and evidence of a potential
Anti-Doping Rule Violation other than an
Adverse Analytical Finding or an Atypical
Finding or an Adverse Passport Finding, the
ITIA will appoint three Review Board members
to consider the matter.

(b) For the review of Whereabouts Failures or

Demands, the ITIA will appoint one or more
suitably qualified Review Board members.

(c) Each Review Board member will be suitably

qualified to consider the case in issue. In
particular, Review Boards reviewing Atypical
Findings and Adverse Analytical Findings will
have one technical, one legal, and one medical
expert.

7.3.2.4 There is no obligation for the Review Board to meet

in person to deliberate. However, any decision by the

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 45

 Review Board that the Player or other Person has a
case to answer under Article 2 must be unanimous.

7.3.2.5 The ITIA will send the relevant papers and evidence
to each of the Review Board members.

(a) Where necessary, the Review Board may

request that the ITIA provide additional
information for the Review Board's
consideration. However, in a case involving an
Adverse Analytical Finding or Atypical Finding,
at no point during its deliberations as to case to
answer should the Review Board be advised of
the identity of the Player involved.

(b) Where an Adverse Analytical Finding may be

consistent with a TUE previously granted to the
Player, in the first instance only the laboratory's
certificate of analysis of the A Sample and
anonymised copies of the TUE application and
decision will be sent to the three Review Board
members. However, if there is no potentially
applicable TUE, or if the Review Board
determines that the Adverse Analytical Finding
is not consistent with the TUE in question, the
ITIA Senior Director, Anti-Doping will send the
entire A Sample laboratory documentation
package to the three Review Board members,
along with any other relevant papers.

7.3.3 Notwithstanding any other provision in this Programme, at any

point in the Results Management process (including, without
limitation, after any further analysis of a Sample, any further
Testing, and/or any further investigation conducted in
accordance with Article 5.7), the ITIA may decide not to bring
an Adverse Analytical Finding or other evidence of a potential
Anti-Doping Rule Violation forward as an Anti-Doping Rule
Violation (either at all or simply at that time). The ITIA will notify
any Interested Party of that decision (with reasons), and (if
notice has previously been sent to the Player in accordance
with Article 7.10) the Player.

7.4 Review of Adverse Analytical Findings

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 46

7.4.1 Adverse Analytical Findings in relation to an A Sample will be
reviewed in accordance with ISRM Article 5.1 and this Article
7.4.

7.4.2 Upon receipt of an Adverse Analytical Finding in relation to an

A Sample, the Review Board will conduct a review of any TUE
granted to the Player as well as of the documentation relating
to the Sample collection and the A Sample analysis, and any
other relevant information, to determine:

7.4.2.1 whether the presence of the Prohibited Substance or

its Metabolites or Markers in the Player's Sample is
consistent with a valid and applicable TUE held by
the Player (or alternatively whether the Player should
be invited to apply for a retroactive TUE); or

7.4.2.2 whether there has been any apparent departure from

the ISTI and ISL that caused the Adverse Analytical
Finding; or

7.4.2.3 whether it is apparent that the Adverse Analytical

Finding was caused by an ingestion of the Prohibited
Substance by a permitted route.

7.4.3 If pursuant to Article 7.4.2 the Review Board determines that

either the Adverse Analytical Finding is consistent with a valid
and applicable TUE held by the Player (including any
retroactive TUE), or that there has been an apparent departure
from either the ISTI or the ISL that caused the Adverse
Analytical Finding, or that it is apparent that the Prohibited
Substance was ingested by a permitted route, the ITIA will
advise the Player and each Interested Party of that fact, and
will take no further action in relation to the Adverse Analytical
Finding.

7.4.4 If pursuant to Article 7.4.2 the Review Board determines that

there is neither a valid and applicable TUE with which the
Adverse Analytical Finding is consistent, nor a departure from
either the ISTI or the ISL that caused the Adverse Analytical
Finding, and nor is it apparent that the Prohibited Substance
was ingested by a permitted route, the ITIA will send the Player
a Notice in accordance with Article 7.10.

7.4.5 Where an application for a retroactive TUE is made in

accordance with Article 4.4.5 for the Prohibited Substance in

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 47

 question, no further action will be taken in respect of the
Adverse Analytical Finding pending a decision on the
application.

7.5 Review of Atypical Findings

7.5.1 Atypical Findings in relation to an A Sample will be reviewed in

accordance with ISRM Article 5.2 and this Article 7.5.

7.5.2 Where a laboratory reports the presence in a Sample of a

Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers as an
Atypical Finding, the Review Board will conduct a review to
determine:

7.5.2.1 whether the presence of the Prohibited Substance or

its Metabolites or Markers in the Player's Sample
is/are consistent with a valid and applicable TUE held
by the Player (or alternatively whether the Player
should be invited to apply for a retroactive TUE, if
they have not applied already); or

7.5.2.2 whether there has been any apparent departure from

the ISTI or the ISL that caused the Atypical Finding;
or

7.5.2.3 whether it is apparent that the Atypical Finding was

caused by an ingestion of the Prohibited Substance
by a permitted route.

7.5.3 If it is determined pursuant to Article 7.5.2 either that the

Atypical Finding is consistent with a valid and applicable TUE
held by the Player (including any retroactive TUE), or that there
has been an apparent departure from either the ISTI or the ISL
that caused the Atypical Finding, or that it is apparent that the
Prohibited Substance was ingested by a permitted route, the
ITIA will advise the Player and each Interested Party of that
fact, and will take no further action in relation to such Atypical
Finding.

7.5.4 If it is determined pursuant to Article 7.5.2 that there is neither

a valid and applicable TUE with which the Atypical Finding is
consistent, nor a departure from either the ISTI or the ISL that
caused the Atypical Finding, and it is not apparent that the
Prohibited Substance was ingested by a permitted route, the
ITIA will conduct any necessary follow-up investigation,
including directing any further Testing that may be required.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 48

 7.5.5 Pending the outcome of the investigation, the Atypical Finding
will be kept confidential, save that:

7.5.5.1 if the ITIA determines that the B Sample should be

analysed as part of the investigation, it will notify the
Player in accordance with Article 7.10.1.5, and such
notice will additionally include a description of the
Atypical Finding and specify the Player's right to
request copies of the A and B Sample laboratory
documentation packages;

7.5.5.2 if requested by an organisation that is about to select

the Player to participate in an International Event, the
ITIA may confirm that the Player has a pending
Atypical Finding, after informing the Player; and

7.5.5.3 if the Atypical Finding is, in the opinion of qualified

medical or expert personnel, likely to be connected
to a serious pathology that requires urgent medical
attention, the ITIA may inform the Player of the
Atypical Finding.

7.5.6 If the ITIA decides not to pursue the Atypical Finding as a

potential Anti-Doping Rule Violation, it will notify the Player and
each Interested Party of that fact. Any such Interested Party
may either appeal that decision in accordance with Article 13
or (if it is an Anti-Doping Organisation) may elect to pursue the
Atypical Finding as an Anti-Doping Rule Violation under its own
rules.

7.5.7 If the ITIA decides to pursue the Atypical Finding as one or

more potential Anti-Doping Rule Violations under Article 2, the
ITIA will send the Player a Notice in accordance with Article
7.10.

7.6 Review of Adverse Passport Findings

7.6.1 Where an Atypical Passport Finding or other ABP-related case

is referred to a single expert from the Expert Panel in
accordance with Article 5.5.5, and the opinion of the single
expert is ‘likely doping’, the file will be referred to a group of
three experts from the Expert Panel (composed of the single
expert appointed in the initial review and two further experts
chosen by the APMU from the Expert Panel) for consideration
in accordance with ISRM Annex C.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 49

 7.6.2 Where all of the three experts from the Expert Panel, having
reviewed the ABP Documentation Package, render a joint
opinion of ‘likely doping’ (an Adverse Passport Finding), the
ITIA will send the Player a Notice in accordance with Article
7.10.

7.7 Review of Whereabouts Failures

7.7.1 Results Management in relation to potential Whereabouts

Failures will be conducted in accordance with ISRM Annex B.3.

7.7.2 Where a Whereabouts Failure by a Player who is subject to the

ITIA’s Results Management authority is uncovered through an
attempt by or on behalf of an Anti-Doping Organisation other
than the ITIA to test that Player, the ITIA will procure the
requisite information and assistance from that other Anti-
Doping Organisation pursuant to ISRM Annex B.3.2 to enable
the ITIA to carry out Results Management in respect of the
Whereabouts Failure.

7.7.3 Where a Player requests an administrative review of a Filing

Failure or Missed Test declared by the ITIA, the Review Board
will carry out that administrative review in accordance with
ISRM Annex B.3.2(f).

7.7.4 If the Review Board concludes that the requirements for

recording a Whereabouts Failure are not all met, the ITIA will
so advise the Player and Interested Parties (and the Anti-
Doping Organisation that uncovered the Whereabouts Failure,
if applicable), giving reasons for that decision. Subject to the
rights of appeal set out at Article 13, the matter will not proceed
any further.

7.7.5 If the Review Board concludes that all of the requirements for
recording a Whereabouts Failure are met, or if the Player does
not request an administrative review, the ITIA will notify the
Player that it is recording a Whereabouts Failure against them.

7.7.6 The ITIA will report a decision to record a Whereabouts Failure

against a Player to WADA and all other relevant Anti-Doping
Organisations via ADAMS.

7.7.7 Where the Whereabouts Failure recorded in accordance with

Article 7.7.5 is the Player's third Whereabouts Failure within a
12-month period, the matter will be referred to the Review
Board to determine whether the Player may have committed

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 50

 an Article 2.4 Anti-Doping Rule Violation. If the Review Board
determines(s) that the Player may have committed an Article
2.4 Anti-Doping Rule Violation, the ITIA will send the Player a
Notice in accordance with Article 7.10.

7.8 Review of other evidence of a potential Anti-Doping Rule Violation

7.8.1 Where there is evidence of a potential Anti-Doping Rule

Violation other than an Adverse Analytical Finding, an Atypical
Finding, an Adverse Passport Finding, or Whereabouts
Failures, the ITIA will review the file in accordance with ISRM
Annex A (where applicable), and will refer the file to the Review
Board to determine whether the Player or other Person may
have committed one or more Anti-Doping Rule Violations under
Article 2.

7.8.2 Where the Review Board conclude that the Player or other
Person may have committed one or more Anti-Doping Rule
Violations under Article 2, the ITIA will send the Player or other
Person a Notice in accordance with Article 7.10.

7.9 Review of Demands

7.9.1 Where the ITIA Senior Director, Anti-Doping wishes to apply

the consequences set out in Article 5.7.3 for a Player's or other
Person's failure to comply with a Demand, the ITIA Senior
Director, Anti-Doping will first refer the Demand to one or more
members of the Review Board to determine whether there is a
good faith basis for the Demand. This reference to the Review
Board may be made before the Demand is made of the Player
or other Person, or after the Demand has been made and the
Player or other Person has failed to comply, but in any event
no consequences may be applied unless and until the Review
Board has determined that there is a good faith basis for the
Demand.

7.9.2 In considering the Demand, the Review Board will have the
discretion but not the obligation to invite such submissions from
the ITIA Senior Director, Anti-Doping and the Player or other
Person in question as it sees fit.

7.9.3 If the Review Board determines that there is no good faith basis
for the Demand, (a) the ITIA Senior Director, Anti-Doping will
not pursue the Demand with the Player or other Person; and

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 51

 (b) no consequences will be imposed on the Player or other
Person for not complying with the Demand.

7.9.4 If the Review Board determines that there is a good faith basis
for the Demand, then if the Player or other Person fails to
produce the information requested in the Demand the
consequences set out at Article 5.7.3 will apply.

7.10 Notice

7.10.1 Where it is determined, pursuant to the previous provisions of

this Article 7, that a Player or other Person may have
committed one or more Anti-Doping Rule Violations under
Article 2, the ITIA will promptly notify the Player or other Person
in writing (the Notice) of:

7.10.1.1 the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s) that the ITIA says

the Player or other Person may have committed;

7.10.1.2 a summary of the facts and evidence relied upon by

the ITIA in this regard;

7.10.1.3 any Provisional Suspension to be imposed on the

Player or other Person pursuant to Article 7.12.1 or
7.12.2, along with an explanation of the Player's or
other Person's Article 7.12.3 rights in relation to such
Provisional Suspension;

7.10.1.4 the Consequences applicable under the Programme

if it is established that the Player or other Person has
committed the specified Anti-Doping Rule
Violation(s) (including identifying any discretion that
may exist in relation to such Consequences under
this Programme);

7.10.1.5 where the specified Anti-Doping Rule Violations are

Article 2.1 and Article 2.2 Anti-Doping Rule Violations
based on an Adverse Analytical Finding:

(a) the details of the Adverse Analytical Finding;

(b) the Player's right to a copy of the laboratory

documentation package for the Adverse
Analytical Finding (or a copy may simply be
enclosed with the Notice);

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 52

 (c) the right of the Player to request the analysis of
the B Sample, explaining that any request for
such analysis must be sent in writing so that it is
received by the ITIA within ten days of the
Player's receipt of the Notice, failing which the
right to the B Sample analysis will be deemed to
be waived; and

(d) if such right is exercised, the right of the Player

and/or the Player's representative to attend the
opening and analysis of the B Sample by the
laboratory that analysed the A Sample at a date
and time to be specified by the ITIA in
accordance with Article 7.11;

7.10.1.6 where the specified Anti-Doping Rule Violation is

based on an Adverse Passport Finding, that copies
of the ABP documentation package and the joint
expert report are enclosed with the Notice;

7.10.1.7 the right of the Player or other Person to provide an

alternative explanation (by a specified deadline) for
the facts based on which the ITIA says the Player or
other Person may have committed an Anti-Doping
Rule Violation (for example, in a case based on an
Adverse Passport Finding, an alternative explanation
for the data on which the Adverse Passport Finding
is based);

7.10.1.8 the right of the Player or other Person to respond to

the Notice, by a specified deadline, in one of the
following ways, depending on the explanation (if any)
provided:

(a) to admit the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s)

asserted, and accede to the Consequences
specified in the Notice;

(b) admit the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s)

asserted, and seek to mitigate the
Consequences specified in the Notice by
agreement with the ITIA pursuant to Article
7.14, or by agreement with the ITIA and WADA
pursuant to Article 10.8.2, without the need for
a hearing (if no agreement is reached, the

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 53

 Consequences may still be disputed at a
hearing);

(c) to admit the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s)

asserted, but to dispute and/or seek to mitigate
the Consequences specified in the Notice, and
to have the Consequences determined at a
hearing conducted in accordance with Article 8;
or

(d) to deny the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s)

asserted, and (if the ITIA proceeds to charge in
accordance with Article 7.13) to have the
assertion and (if necessary) any Consequences
determined at a hearing conducted in
accordance with Article 8; and

7.10.1.9 the opportunity for the Player or other Person:

(a) to provide Substantial Assistance as set out in

Article 10.7.1;

(b) to benefit (if they admit the Anti-Doping Rule

Violation(s)) from the one-year reduction of the
otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility
pursuant to Article 10.8.1 (if applicable); and/or

(c) to seek to enter into a case resolution

agreement as per Article 10.8.2 or (where the
ITIA considers it appropriate in the
circumstances) to seek to resolve the matter
without a hearing in accordance with Article
7.14.

7.10.2 Before sending the Notice to the Player or other Person, the
ITIA will refer to ADAMS and contact WADA and other relevant
Anti-Doping Organisations to determine whether the Player or
other Person has any prior Anti-Doping Violations.

7.10.3 The ITIA will send a copy of the Notice to each Interested Party.

7.11 B Sample analysis

7.11.1 In a case involving an Adverse Analytical Finding, if the Player

exercises the right to have their B Sample analysed, such
analysis will, save where the ISL provides to the contrary, be

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 54

 conducted by the laboratory that analysed the A Sample, on
the date and at the time specified by the ITIA, and the Player
and/or their representative may attend at the laboratory on that
date and at that time, at the Player's cost, to witness the
opening and analysis of the B Sample, as may representatives
of the ITIA and the Player's NADO (each at their own cost).

7.11.2 If the Player and/or their representative is unable to attend at

the date and time specified by the ITIA for analysis of the B
Sample, alternative dates and times will be offered in
accordance with ISRM Article 5.1.2.4. If the Player and their
representative are unable to attend on those alternative dates,
the laboratory will arrange for an independent witness to attend
the B Sample analysis on the specified date and time to verify,
in accordance with the ISL, that the B Sample container shows
no signs of Tampering and that the identifying numbers on the
container correspond to those on the Sample collection
documentation.

7.11.3 If the Player admits the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s) asserted

in the Notice, and/or does not request analysis of their B
Sample by the deadline referenced in Article 7.10.1.5(c), they
will be deemed to have accepted the accuracy and reliability of
the Adverse Analytical Finding based on the A Sample analysis
alone, and analysis of the B Sample will not be required. The
ITIA may however proceed with such analysis at any time if it
sees fit, in which case an independent witness will attend the
analysis for the purpose set out in Article 7.11.2.

7.11.4 Where a Player who has requested analysis of their B Sample

has been Provisionally Suspended in accordance with Article
7.12, they will remain Provisionally Suspended pending
analysis of their B Sample. If the analysis of the B Sample does
not confirm the Adverse Analytical Finding reported in respect
of the A Sample, then (unless the ITIA asserts an Article 2.2
Anti-Doping Rule Violation against the Player) the entire test
will be considered negative and the Player and each Interested
Party will be so informed. In such circumstances, the Notice will
be withdrawn, any Provisional Suspension imposed on the
Player pursuant to Article 7.12 will be deemed automatically
vacated with immediate effect (without the need for any order
from the Independent Tribunal), and no further disciplinary
action will be taken against the Player by the ITIA in relation to
the original Adverse Analytical Finding (provided, however, that
the ITIA may investigate why the B Sample did not match the

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 55

 A Sample). In addition, where the Player or the Player's team
has been removed from a Competition as a result of the
Adverse Analytical Finding, if it is still possible (without
otherwise affecting the Competition) for the Player or team to
be reinstated, the Player or team may be reinstated and
continue to take part in the Competition.

7.11.5 If the B Sample analysis confirms the Adverse Analytical

Finding reported in respect of the A Sample, the ITIA will
provide the B Sample laboratory documentation package to the
Player, and give the Player a short deadline to provide or
supplement their explanation for the Adverse Analytical
Finding, and/or to admit the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s)
specified in the Notice based on the Adverse Analytical Finding
to potentially benefit from a one-year reduction in the otherwise
applicable period of Ineligibility under Article 10.8.1 (if
applicable), and/or to accept a voluntary Provisional
Suspension under Article 7.12.5 (if applicable). In case of doubt
as to whether the B Sample analysis confirms the Adverse
Analytical Finding in respect of the A Sample, the ITIA may
refer the matter to one or more Review Board members, as it
deems appropriate.

7.11.6 Where Article 7.11.3 and/or 7.11.4 applies, the ITIA will be
responsible for the costs of the B Sample analysis. Where
Article 7.11.5 applies, the ITIA may require the Player to pay
the costs of the B Sample analysis.

7.12 Provisional Suspension

7.12.1 Mandatory Provisional Suspension based on an Adverse

Analytical Finding or Adverse Passport Finding:

Where a Notice is issued to a Player based on an Adverse

Analytical Finding or Adverse Passport Finding for a Prohibited
Substance that is not a Specified Substance or for Use of a
Prohibited Method that is not a Specified Method, then (subject
only to Article 7.12.3) a Provisional Suspension will come into
effect automatically on the date specified by the ITIA in the
Notice or in further correspondence up to and including the
Charge Letter.

7.12.2 Discretionary Provisional Suspension in other cases:

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 56

 In cases where a Notice is issued that is not covered by Article
7.12.1, the ITIA will decide whether or not to apply this Article
7.12.2.

7.12.2.1 If the ITIA decides to apply this Article 7.12.2, then

(subject only to Article 7.12.3) a Provisional
Suspension will come into effect automatically on the
date specified by the ITIA in the Notice or in further
correspondence up to and including the Charge
Letter.

7.12.2.2 If the ITIA does not impose a Provisional Suspension

further to Article 7.12.2.1, no Provisional Suspension
will come into effect prior to determination of the case
unless (1) it is voluntarily accepted by the Player or
other Person in accordance with Article 7.12.5; or (2)
it is so ordered by the Independent Tribunal on
application by the ITIA, which application must be
based on material new evidence that was not
available to the ITIA at the time the Charge Letter
was sent.

7.12.3 Challenging the imposition of a Provisional Suspension:

7.12.3.1 A Player or other Person who receives notice of a

Provisional Suspension pursuant to Article 7.12.1 or
7.12.2 has the right to apply to the Independent
Tribunal, either before the Provisional Suspension
comes into force or at any time prior to the final first
instance decision on the merits, seeking an order that
the Provisional Suspension should not be imposed
(or, where it has been imposed, that it should be
lifted), provided that:

(a) If the Player or other Person applies before the

date specified in the Notice (or in subsequent
correspondence, where applicable) for when
the Provisional Suspensions comes into effect,
the Provisional Suspension will not come into
effect pending the decision on the application.

(b) If the Player or other Person applies for the

Provisional Suspension to be lifted after it has
come into effect, the Provisional Suspension will

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 57

 remain in place pending the decision on the
application.

(c) The Provisional Suspension will be imposed (or

will not be lifted) unless the Player or other
Person establishes that:

(i) the assertion of an Anti-Doping Rule

Violation has no reasonable prospect of
being upheld, e.g., because of a patent
flaw in the case against the Player or other
Person; or

(ii) any period of Ineligibility that might

otherwise be imposed for the Anti-Doping
Rule Violation(s) asserted is likely to be
completely eliminated by application of
Article 10.5 (No Fault or Negligence); or

(iii) the Anti-Doping Rule Violation asserted is

likely to have involved a Contaminated
Product; or

(iv) the Anti-Doping Rule Violation asserted

involves a Substance of Abuse and the
Player establishes entitlement to a reduced
period of Ineligibility under Article 10.2.4.1;
or

(v) other facts exist that make it clearly unfair,

in all of the circumstances, for the Player or
other Person to be subject to a Provisional
Suspension prior to the final first instance
decision on the merits. This ground is to be
construed narrowly and applied only in
truly exceptional circumstances. For
example, the fact that the Provisional
Suspension would prevent the Player or
other Person participating in a particular
Competition or Event will not qualify as
exceptional circumstances for these
purposes.

(d) If the application to have a Provisional

Suspension lifted is not granted (including after

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 58

 any appeal in accordance with Article 13.2), a
further application may not be made to lift the
Provisional Suspension unless (i) it is based on
material new evidence that the Player or other
Person was not aware of and could not
reasonably have been aware of at the time they
made the original application; or (ii) there has
been some other significant and material
change in circumstances since the original
application was decided. If a Player or other
Person makes a further application that does
not meet either of these requirements, costs
may be awarded against them.

7.12.3.2 Procedure:

(a) Any submissions that the Player or other Person

wishes to make (personally or through a
representative) in support of the application
must be made in writing to the Chair of the
Independent Tribunal at the same time as the
application is made, with a copy sent
simultaneously to the ITIA Senior Director, Anti-
Doping.

(b) Any submissions that the ITIA Senior Director,

Anti-Doping wishes to make (personally or
through a representative) must be made in
writing to the Chair of the Independent Tribunal
as soon as possible after receipt of the Player's
or other Person's submissions, with a copy sent
simultaneously to the Player or other Person.

(c) The Chair of the Independent Tribunal, sitting

alone, will rule on the application as soon as
reasonably practicable. The Chair will have
discretion, where fairness requires, to invite or
to allow the parties to make oral submissions,
either by a telephone conference call or in
person, prior to rendering their decision on the
application. For the avoidance of doubt,
however, neither party will have the right to
make such submissions if the Chair in their
discretion does not invite or allow such
submissions.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 59

7.12.4 Provisional Suspension decisions may be appealed as
provided in Articles 13.2 and 13.4.

7.12.5 Voluntary acceptance of Provisional Suspension:

7.12.5.1 A Player may voluntarily accept a Provisional

Suspension, provided that they do so no later than
the latest of the following dates: (1) ten days after
receipt of a Notice; (2) ten days after waiver of the B
Sample analysis or receipt of the results of analysis
of the B Sample (as applicable); or (3) the date after
receipt of a Notice on which the Player would
otherwise first compete.

7.12.5.2 Other Persons may voluntarily accept a Provisional

Suspension within ten days of receipt of a Notice.

7.12.5.3 A Provisional Suspension that is voluntarily accepted

by the applicable deadline will have effect from the
date that written notice of the Player's or other
Person's acceptance of a voluntary Provisional
Suspension is received by the ITIA, and will be
treated in the same manner as a Provisional
Suspension imposed in accordance with Article
7.12.1 or 7.12.2.

7.12.5.4 The Player or other Person may withdraw their

voluntary acceptance of a Provisional Suspension,
but in that event they will not receive any credit for
the Provisional Suspension served.

7.12.6 During the period of any Provisional Suspension (whether

imposed or voluntarily accepted), the status of a Player or other
Person who is subject to the Provisional Suspension will be as
set out in Article 10.14.1.

7.12.7 A Player who is subject to a Provisional Suspension has the

right, if they so wish, to an expedited hearing on the merits of
the case brought against them pursuant to Article 8.

7.12.8 If a Player is not Provisionally Suspended and continues to

compete in Events pending determination of the matter, where
requested by the ITIA, the organisers of the relevant Events will
pay to the ITIA upon demand the following proportions of any
Prize Money won by the Player subsequent to their receipt of
the Notice (taken in aggregate, across all of the relevant

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 60

 Events), to be held in escrow pending the determination of the
charge:

Total Aggregate Prize Percentage Withheld

Money
US$0-7,500 0%
US$7,501-27,500 50%
US$27,501+ 100%
If the final decision of the Independent Tribunal does not
require the forfeiture of such escrowed Prize Money, then it will
be returned without delay to the Player, together with any
interest earned on the money while it was in escrow. If such
forfeiture is required, any interest earned will be retained by the
ITIA.

7.12.9 No admission will be inferred, or other adverse inference

drawn, from the decision of a Player or other Person (a) not to
make an application under Article 7.12.3 to avoid (or to vacate)
a Provisional Suspension; or (b) to accept a voluntary
Provisional Suspension under Article 7.12.5.

7.12.10 Once a Provisional Suspension has come into effect:

(a) Where the Player who has been Provisionally Suspended

is a Minor, Protected Person, or Recreational Athlete, the
ITIA may publicly announce the Provisional Suspension if
it considers it proportionate to the facts and circumstances
of the case to do so.

(b) In all other cases, the ITIA will publicly announce the
Provisional Suspension.

(c) In each case where a Provisional Suspension is publicly

announced, it will be made public no earlier than ten days
after the Notice (or subsequent correspondence, if
applicable) confirming the imposition of a Provisional
Suspension is sent.

7.13 Charge Letter

7.13.1 Upon receipt of a response by a Player or other Person to an

Article 7.10 Notice, the ITIA will assess any explanation
provided, and may conduct such further investigation as it sees
fit, including (without limitation) requesting further information
and/or documents from the Player or other Person to whom the

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 61

 Notice was sent within a set deadline, and/or liaising with third
parties.

7.13.1.1 In a case based on an Adverse Passport Finding, the

ITIA will forward any explanation provided by the
Player, together with any supporting information
supplied by the Player, to the three experts from the
Expert Panel referred to in Article 7.6, for
consideration (along with any other information that
the three experts deem necessary) in accordance
with the relevant International Standards.

7.13.1.2 If, following such consideration, the three experts

from the Expert Panel are no longer unanimously of
the opinion that the case is one of ‘likely doping’, the
ITIA will notify the Player and each Interested Party
and (subject to the rights of appeal set out at Article
13) the matter will not proceed any further.

7.13.1.3 If, following such consideration, the three experts

from the Expert Panel maintain their opinion,
notwithstanding the Player's explanation, that the
case is one of ‘likely doping’, the ITIA will charge the
Player in accordance with Article 7.13.2.

7.13.2 Where, after receipt of the response of the Player or other

Person to the Notice, or after expiry of the deadline to receive
such response without any response being received, and after
conducting such further investigation as it sees fit (if any), the
ITIA considers that the Player or other Person has committed
one or more Anti-Doping Rule Violations, the ITIA will send the
Player or other Person a letter setting out the following (the
Charge Letter), with copies to the Chair of the Independent
Panel and each Interested Party:

7.13.2.1 the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s) that the ITIA

asserts the Player or other Person has committed;

7.13.2.2 a summary of the facts and evidence relied upon by

the ITIA in support of that assertion;

7.13.2.3 the Consequences that the ITIA will seek if it is

established that the Player or other Person has
committed the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s)
asserted;

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 62

 7.13.2.4 the right of the Player or other Person to respond to
the Charge Letter (by a specified deadline of not
more than 20 days, which may be extended only in
exceptional cases) in one of the ways set out in
Article 7.13.3.

7.13.2.5 a warning that if the Player or other Person does not

deny the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s) asserted or
the proposed Consequences or request a hearing by
the prescribed deadline, the Player or other Person
will be deemed to have waived their right to a hearing
and admitted the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s)
asserted and the Consequences proposed in the
Charge Letter (although, for the avoidance of doubt,
this will not trigger any entitlement to the one-year
reduction pursuant to Article 10.8.1);

7.13.2.6 noting the position in relation to any Provisional

Suspension in accordance with Article 7.10; and

7.13.2.7 noting the opportunity for the Player or other Person

to provide Substantial Assistance as set out in Article
10.7.1, and/or to seek to enter into a case resolution
agreement as per Article 10.8.2.

7.13.3 The Player or other Person has the right to respond to the
Charge Letter in any one of the following ways:

7.13.3.1 admit the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s) charged, and

accede to the Consequences specified in the Charge
Letter, including the one-year reduction pursuant to
Article 10.8.1 of the otherwise applicable period of
Ineligibility (if applicable);

7.13.3.2 admit the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s) charged, and

seek to mitigate the Consequences specified in the
Charge Letter by agreement with the ITIA pursuant
to Article 7.14, or by agreement with the ITIA and
WADA pursuant to Article 10.8.2, without the need
for a hearing (if no agreement is reached, the
Consequences may still be disputed at a hearing);

7.13.3.3 admit the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s) charged, and

dispute and/or seek to mitigate the Consequences
specified in the Charge Letter, and have the

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 63

 Consequences determined at a hearing conducted in
accordance with Article 8; or

7.13.3.4 deny the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s) charged, and

have the charge and (if necessary) any
Consequences determined at a hearing conducted in
accordance with Article 8;

provided that if no response is received by the deadline

specified in the Charge Letter, the Player or other Person will
be deemed to have admitted the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s)
charged, and, unless the ITIA (at its sole discretion) refers the
determination of the applicable Consequences to a hearing
conducted in accordance with Article 8, the Player or other
Person will also be deemed to have acceded to the
Consequences specified in the Charge Letter.

7.13.4 After sending the Charge Letter, the ITIA may Publicly Disclose
the charge in accordance with Code Article 14.3.1.

7.13.5 If by the deadline specified in Article 7.13.2 the Player or other

Person disputes the charge(s) and/or the Consequences
specified by the ITIA in the Charge Letter and requests a
hearing, the matter will be referred to the Independent Tribunal
in accordance with Article 8.

7.14 Case resolution without a hearing

7.14.1 At any time prior to a final decision by the Independent Tribunal,

the ITIA may invite the Player or other Person to admit the Anti-
Doping Rule Violation(s) asserted and accede to specified
Consequences (in accordance with Article 10.8 or otherwise in
accordance with this Programme); or to admit any other
violation of this Programme that does not amount to an Anti-
Doping Rule Violation and accept specified Consequences (in
accordance with this Programme); or the ITIA may decide to
withdraw a Charge Letter for good cause.

7.14.2 In the event that the Player or other Person admits the Anti-
Doping Rule Violation(s) asserted and accedes to
Consequences specified by the ITIA (or is deemed to have
done so in accordance with Article 7.13.3), the ITIA will
promptly issue a reasoned decision confirming the commission
of the Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s) and the imposition of the
specified Consequences (as applicable), will send notice of the

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 64

 decision to the Player or other Person and to each Interested
Party, and will Publicly Disclose the decision in accordance
with Article 8.6. Where the Player or other Person admits any
other violation of this Programme that does not amount to an
Anti-Doping Rule Violation and accedes to Consequences
specified by the ITIA, the ITIA will promptly issue a reasoned
decision confirming the commission of the violation and the
imposition of the specified Consequences (as applicable), will
send notice to the Player or other Person, the ITF, and to such
other Interested Parties as the ITIA considers appropriate, and
may publish the decision (or a summary thereof) on its website.

7.14.3 Any decision issued by the ITIA in accordance with Article

7.14.2 that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation has been committed
will not purport to be limited in effect to a particular geographic
area or sport, and will address and determine (without
limitation): (1) the factual basis of the decision that an Anti-
Doping Rule Violation was committed; and (2) all of the
Consequences to be imposed for such Anti-Doping Rule
Violation, including the reasons for imposing the
Consequences specified, and in particular the reasons for
exercising any discretion not to impose the full Consequences
available under this Programme.

7.14.4 In the event that the ITIA withdraws the Charge Letter, it will
promptly issue a reasoned decision confirming the withdrawal
of the Charge Letter, will send notice of the decision to the
Player or other Person and to each Interested Party, and will
Publicly Disclose the decision in accordance with Article 8.6
(save that the decision will not be Publicly Disclosed where no
Provisional Suspension was imposed and the fact that the
Player or other Person was charged has not otherwise been
made public).

7.15 Other disciplinary offences

7.15.1 Where a Player or other Person:

7.15.1.1 engages in offensive conduct towards a Doping

Control official or other Person involved in Doping
Control that does not rise to the level of Tampering;

7.15.1.2 refuses or fails to cooperate in full with the ITIA

and/or other Anti-Doping Organisations investigating
Anti-Doping Rule Violations;

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 65

 7.15.1.3 refuses or fails without compelling justification to
comply with any provision of this Programme, where
such refusal or failure does not fall within any of the
Anti-Doping Rule Violations defined in Article 2;
and/or

7.15.1.4 if they are a Player Support Person, Uses or

Possesses a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited
Method without valid justification;

the Player or other Person will not be deemed to have

committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation and they will not be
subject to any of the Consequences set out in Articles 9 and
10. However, disciplinary proceedings may be brought against
them before the Independent Tribunal in accordance with
Article 8 or resolved without a hearing under Article 7.14. If the
Independent Tribunal finds the misconduct alleged to be
proven to its comfortable satisfaction, or if the Player or other
Person admits the violation and does not request a hearing to
determine the Consequences, the Independent Tribunal or (as
applicable) the ITIA may impose upon the Player or other
Person such sanctions as it sees fit (which may include
a period during which the Player or other Person will not be
eligible to participate in the sport). The decision of the
Independent Tribunal under this provision may be appealed by
the ITIA or the Player or other Person concerned to the Court
of Arbitration for Sport (Appeals Division), in accordance with
the Code of Sports-related Arbitration. Any agreed decision
issued under this Article 7.15 in conjunction with Article 7.14 is
not subject to appeal.

8. Results Management: proceedings before an Independent

Tribunal

8.1 Jurisdiction of the Independent Panel

The following matters arising under this Programme will be submitted

for determination by an Independent Tribunal in accordance with the
Procedural Rules Governing Proceedings Before an Independent
Tribunal, as amended from time to time:

8.1.1 A charge that one or more Anti-Doping Rule Violations has

been committed (and any issues relating to that charge).
Where such charge is upheld, the Independent Tribunal will

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 66

 determine what Consequences (if any) should be imposed, in
accordance with and pursuant to Articles 9 and 10.

8.1.2 An application for an order that a Provisional Suspension

should or should not be imposed (or should be lifted).

8.1.3 Any case submitted to it pursuant to Article 10.14.7.

8.1.4 Any case submitted to it pursuant to Article 7.15.

8.1.5 Any other matter that may arise from time to time under this
Programme that the ITIA considers should be determined by
the Independent Tribunal.

8.2 Convening the Independent Tribunal

8.2.1 Where a Player or other Person disputes all or part of a charge,

and seeks a hearing before an Independent Tribunal, the Chair
of the Independent Panel will appoint three people from the
Independent Panel to form an Independent Tribunal to hear
and determine the dispute, consisting of a legally qualified
member acting as Chair of the Independent Tribunal and
(subject to Article 8.3.2.1) two other suitably qualified members.

8.2.2 The Independent Panel and each Independent Tribunal will be

Operationally Independent and Institutionally Independent, and
will conduct its activities, including hearings, in accordance with
ISRM Article 8, and without interference from the ITIA or the
ITF or any third party. Board members, staff members,
commission members, consultants, and officials of the ITIA and
the ITF and its affiliates may not be appointed as members
and/or clerks of the Independent Tribunal. In particular, no
member or clerk of the Independent Tribunal may have
previously had any involvement in any TUE application or
Results Management decision relating to a case in which they
are asked to sit.

8.3 Preliminary meeting with the Chair of the Independent Tribunal

8.3.1 Once appointed, the Chair of the Independent Tribunal will

convene a preliminary meeting with the ITIA and its legal
representatives, and with the Player or other Person and/or
their legal representatives (if any), unless directions are agreed
by the parties and approved by the Chair. The meeting may be
held in person or by telephone conference call. The non-

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 67

 attendance of the Player or other Person or their representative
at the meeting, after proper notice of the meeting has been
provided, will not prevent the Chair of the Independent Tribunal
from proceeding with the meeting in the Player's or other
Person's absence, whether or not any written submissions are
made on the Player's or other Person's behalf.

8.3.2 The purpose of the preliminary meeting will be to allow the

Chair to address any pre-hearing issues. In particular (but
without limitation), the Chair will:

8.3.2.1 consider any request by either party that the Chair

hear the matter sitting alone;

8.3.2.2 consider any request by either party that the case be

consolidated for hearing with any other pending
case(s);

8.3.2.3 consider any request by a party for a public hearing;

8.3.2.4 determine the date(s) (which must be at least 21

days after the meeting, unless the parties consent to
a shorter period) upon which the hearing will be held.
Subject to the foregoing sentence, the hearing will be
commenced as soon as practicable after the
response to the Charge Letter is received, and
ordinarily within 60 days of the date that the Player
or other Person requests a hearing. It should be
completed expeditiously;

8.3.2.5 where the Player or other Person disputes the

commission of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation,
establish dates reasonably in advance of the date of
the hearing at which:

(a) the ITIA must submit a brief with argument on

all issues that the ITIA wishes to raise at the
hearing (on liability and on Consequences) and
written witness statements from each fact
and/or expert witness that the ITIA intends to
call at the hearing, setting out the evidence that
the ITIA wishes the Independent Tribunal to
hear from the witness, and enclosing copies of
the documents that the ITIA intends to introduce
at the hearing;

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 68

 (b) the Player or other Person must submit an
answering brief, addressing the ITIA’s
arguments and setting out argument on the
issues that the Player or other Person wishes to
raise at the hearing, as well as written witness
statements from the Player or other Person and
from each other witness (fact and/or expert) that
the Player or other Person intends to call at the
hearing, setting out the evidence that the Player
or other Person wishes the Independent
Tribunal to hear from the witness, and enclosing
copies of the documents that the Player or other
Person intends to introduce at the hearing; and

(c) the ITIA may submit a reply brief, responding to

the Player's or other Person's answer brief and
producing any rebuttal witness statements
and/or documents;

8.3.2.6 alternatively, where the Player or other Person accepts

that they have committed the Anti-Doping Rule
Violation(s) charged, but disputes the Consequences,
establish dates reasonably in advance of the date of
the hearing at which:

(a) the Player or other Person must submit a brief

setting out argument on the issues that the Player
or other Person wishes to raise at the hearing, as
well as written witness statements from the
Player or other Person and from each other
witness (fact and/or expert) that the Player or
other Person intends to call at the hearing, setting
out the evidence that the Player or other Person
wishes the Independent Tribunal to hear from the
witness, and enclosing copies of the documents
that the Player or other Person intends to
introduce at the hearing; and

(b) the ITIA must submit an answering brief with

argument on all issues that the ITIA wishes to
raise at the hearing and written witness
statements from each fact and/or expert witness
that the ITIA intends to call at the hearing, setting
out the evidence that the ITIA wishes the
Independent Tribunal to hear from the witness,

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 69

 and enclosing copies of the documents that the
ITIA intends to introduce at the hearing; and

8.3.2.7 make such order as the Chair deems appropriate in

relation to the production of relevant documents
and/or other materials between the parties; provided
that save for good cause shown no documents
and/or other materials will be ordered to be produced
in relation to any Adverse Analytical Finding beyond
the documents that the ISL requires to be included in
the laboratory documentation pack.

8.3.3 The parties will be required to raise at the preliminary meeting

any legitimate objection that they may have to any of the
members of the Independent Tribunal convened to hear the
case. Any unjustified delay in raising any such objection will
constitute a waiver of the objection. If any objection is made,
the Chair of the Independent Panel will rule on its legitimacy.

8.3.4 If, because of a legitimate objection or for any other reason, a

member of the Independent Tribunal is, or becomes, unwilling
or unable to hear the case, the Chair of the Independent Panel
may, in their absolute discretion: (a) appoint a replacement
member from the Independent Panel; or (b) authorise the
remaining members to hear the case on their own.

8.4 Conduct of hearings before the Independent Tribunal

8.4.1 A party has the right to request a public hearing. Such request
may however be denied in the interest of morals, public order,
national security, where the interests of Minors or the protection
of the private life of the parties so require, where publicity would
prejudice the interests of justice, or where the proceedings are
exclusively related to questions of law.

8.4.2 Anti-Doping Organisations with a right of appeal under Article

13.2 who are not joined as a party to the proceedings before
the Independent Tribunal will have the right (a) to be kept
advised of the status and outcome (with reasons) of the
proceedings; and (b) to attend all hearings as observers.

8.4.3 Subject to the discretion of the Chair of the Independent

Tribunal to order otherwise for good cause shown by either
party, hearings before the Independent Tribunal will:

8.4.3.1 take place in London;

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 70

 8.4.3.2 subject to Article 8.4.1, be conducted on a
confidential basis; and

8.4.3.3 will be in English, and certified English translations

must be submitted of any non-English documents put
before the Independent Tribunal. The cost of the
translation will be borne by the party offering the
document(s).

8.4.4 If required by the Chair, the ITIA will make arrangements to

have the hearing recorded or transcribed (save for the private
deliberations of the Independent Tribunal). If requested by the
Player or other Person, the ITIA will also arrange for a
translator to attend the hearing to translate oral questions
and/or answers. The costs of such transcription and translation
will be paid by the ITIA, subject to any costs-shifting order by
the Independent Tribunal.

8.4.5 Each of the ITIA and the Player or other Person has the right
to be present and to be heard at the hearing. Each of the ITIA
and the Player or other Person also has the right (at their own
expense) to be represented at the hearing by legal counsel of
their own choosing.

8.4.6 Subject always to the confidentiality provisions of Article 14.4:

8.4.6.1 The ITF, WADA, and the NADO of the Player or other
Person may attend the hearing as observers. In any
event, the ITIA will keep them fully apprised as to the
status of pending cases and the result of all hearings.

8.4.6.2 Subject always to any contrary direction made by the

Chair of the Independent Tribunal for good cause
shown, (a) where the Player charged has an ATP
ranking, an ATP representative may attend the
hearing as an observer if the ATP so desires; (b)
where the Player charged has a WTA ranking, a
WTA representative may attend the hearing as an
observer if the WTA so desires; and (c) where the
charge is based on an Adverse Analytical Finding in
respect of a Sample collected at a Grand Slam event,
a representative of the Grand Slam Board may
attend the hearing as an observer if the Grand Slam
Board so desires.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 71

 8.4.7 Subject strictly to Article 3.2.7, the Player or other Person may
choose not to appear in person at the hearing, but rather to
provide a written submission for consideration by the
Independent Tribunal, in which case the Independent Tribunal
will consider the submission in its deliberations. The non-
attendance of the Player or other Person or their representative
at the hearing, after proper notice of the hearing has been
provided, will not prevent the Independent Tribunal from
proceeding with the hearing in their absence, whether or not
any written submissions are made on their behalf.

8.4.8 The procedure followed at the hearing will be at the discretion

of the Chair of the Independent Tribunal, provided that the
hearing is conducted in accordance with the relevant
provisions in the ISRM, in a fair manner, with a reasonable
opportunity for each party to present evidence (including the
right to call and to question witnesses), address the
Independent Tribunal, and present their case.

8.5 Decisions of the Independent Tribunal

8.5.1 Once the parties have completed their respective submissions,

the Independent Tribunal will retire to deliberate in private as
to whether an Anti-Doping Rule Violation has been committed
and (if so) what the Consequences should be. Where Article
10 specifies a range of possible sanctions for the Anti-Doping
Rule Violation found to have been committed, the Independent
Tribunal will also fix the sanction within that range for the case
at hand, after considering any submissions on the subject that
the parties may wish to make.

8.5.2 The Independent Tribunal will not make any verbal

announcement of the decision but instead will issue its decision
in writing within 14 days after the conclusion of the hearing (or
where, exceptionally, that deadline cannot be met, as soon
thereafter as possible). Such decision (which must comply with
ISRM Article 9) must be sent to the parties, the ITF, and to
WADA and to any other party that has a right to appeal the
decision pursuant to Article 13 (and any such party may, within
15 days of receipt, request a copy of the full case file pertaining
to the decision). The decision will set out and explain:

(a) with reasons, the Independent Tribunal's findings as to

whether any Anti-Doping Rule Violation(s) has/have been
committed;

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 72

 (b) with reasons, the Independent Tribunal's findings as to
what Consequences, if any, are (or are not) to be
imposed, including (if applicable) a justification for why
the maximum potential sanction was not imposed;

(c) with reasons, the date that such Consequences will come
into force and effect; and

(d) the rights of appeal applicable pursuant to Article 13.

8.5.3 The ITIA will pay the costs of convening the Independent
Tribunal and of staging the hearing, subject to any costs-
shifting order that the Independent Tribunal may make further
to Article 8.5.4.

8.5.4 The Independent Tribunal has the power to make a costs order
against any party, where it is proportionate to do so. If it does
not exercise that power, each party will bear its own costs,
legal, expert, hearing, and otherwise.

8.5.5 Subject only to the rights of appeal under Article 13, the
Independent Tribunal's decision will be the full, final and
complete disposition of the case and will be binding on all
parties.

8.6 Publication of decisions

8.6.1 Where it is determined by the Independent Tribunal that an

Anti-Doping Rule Violation has been committed, or a case is
resolved without a hearing (under Article 7.14 or Article 10.8)
on the basis that the Player or other Person admits or is
deemed to have admitted that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation
has been committed, or a new period of Ineligibility or a
reprimand has been imposed under Article 10.14.7, that
decision may be Publicly Disclosed immediately. If the decision
is not appealed, or is upheld on appeal, the decision (if not
previously Publicly Disclosed) must be Publicly Disclosed
within 20 days of the expiry of the appeal deadline or the appeal
decision (as applicable). However, this mandatory Public
Disclosure will not apply where the Player or other Person who
has been found to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule
Violation, or to have violated the prohibition against
participation during Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension, is a
Protected Person, Minor, or Recreational Athlete. Any Public
Reporting in a case involving a Protected Person, Minor, or

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 73

 Recreational Athlete is optional and must be proportionate to
the facts and circumstances of the case.

8.6.2 Where it is determined that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation has

not been committed, or that the prohibition against participation
during Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension has not been
violated, the decision will not be Publicly Disclosed unless the
Player or other Person consents to such disclosure. Where the
Player or other Person does not so consent, a summary of the
decision may be published, provided that what is disclosed
does not identify the Player or other Person.

8.6.3 Publication will be accomplished at a minimum by placing the

required information on the ITIA’s website and leaving the
information up for the longer of (a) one month; and (b) the
duration of any period of Ineligibility.

8.7 Single hearing before CAS

With the consent of the parties and WADA, an assertion that the Player
or other Person has committed one or more Anti-doping Rule Violations
may be heard directly by CAS, with no requirement for a prior hearing.

9. Disqualification of results

9.1 Automatic Disqualification of individual results

An Anti-Doping Rule Violation committed by a Player in connection with

or arising out of an In-Competition test automatically leads to
Disqualification of the results obtained by the Player in the Competition
in question, with all resulting consequences, including forfeiture of any
medals, titles, ranking points and Prize Money obtained by the Player
in that Competition.
[Comment to Article 9.1: In addition, further results obtained by the Player in the
same or subsequent Events may be Disqualified, in accordance with Article 10.1
(same Event) and/or Article 10.10 (subsequent Events)].

9.2 Disqualification of Results of Doubles Partner

9.2.1 Where results obtained by a Player in a doubles Competition

are Disqualified pursuant to Article 9.1 because of that Player's
Anti-Doping Rule Violation in connection with or arising out of
that doubles Competition, the result of the Player's doubles
partner in that Competition will also be Disqualified, with all

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 74

 resulting consequences, including forfeiture of all medals,
titles, ranking points and Prize Money.

9.2.2 Where results obtained by a Player in a doubles Competition

are Disqualified pursuant to Article 10.1 because of that
Player's Anti-Doping Rule Violation in relation to another
Competition at that Event, the result of the Player's doubles
partner in that doubles Competition will also be Disqualified,
with all resulting consequences, including forfeiture of all
medals, titles, ranking points and Prize Money, unless the
doubles partner establishes at a hearing, on the balance of
probabilities, (a) that they were not implicated in the first
Player's Anti-Doping Rule Violation; and (b) that the result in
the doubles Competition was not likely to have been affected
by the first Player's Anti-Doping Rule Violation.

9.2.3 Where results obtained by a Player in doubles Competition(s)

in an Event played subsequent to the Competition that
produced the positive Sample are Disqualified pursuant to
Article 10.10 because of that Player's Anti-Doping Rule
Violation, the result of the Player's doubles partner(s) in such
subsequent Competition(s) will not be Disqualified unless the
ITIA establishes, to the comfortable satisfaction of the
Independent Tribunal, that the doubles partner(s) was
implicated in the first Player's Anti-Doping Rule Violation.

10. Ineligibility sanctions for individuals

10.1 Disqualification of results in the Event during which an Anti-

Doping Rule Violation occurs

10.1.1 Except as provided in Article 10.1.2, where a Player is found to

have committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation during or in
connection with a Competition in an Event where the Player
also participated in other Competitions, any individual results
obtained by the Player in the other Competitions in that Event
will be Disqualified, with all resulting consequences, including
forfeiture of all medals, titles, ranking points and Prize Money.

10.1.2 If the Player establishes that they bear No Fault or Negligence

for the Anti-Doping Rule Violation in question, the Player's
results obtained in the Competition(s) other than the
Competition during or in connection with which the Anti-Doping
Rule Violation occurred will not be Disqualified unless the ITIA
establishes that the Player's results in the other Competition(s)

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 75

 were likely to have been affected by their Anti-Doping Rule
Violation.

10.2 Imposition of a period of Ineligibility for presence, Use or

Attempted Use, or Possession of a Prohibited Substance or
Prohibited Method

The period of Ineligibility imposed for an Anti-Doping Rule Violation

under Article 2.1, 2.2 or 2.6 that is the Player's or other Person's first
doping offence will be as follows, subject to potential elimination,
reduction, or suspension pursuant to Article 10.5, 10.6, or 10.7.

10.2.1 Save where Article 10.2.4.1 applies, the period of Ineligibility

will be four years:

10.2.1.1 where the Anti-Doping Rule Violation does not

involve a Specified Substance or a Specified
Method, unless the Player or other Person
establishes that the Anti-Doping Rule Violation was
not intentional; and

10.2.1.2 where the Anti-Doping Rule Violation involves a

Specified Substance or a Specified Method and the
ITIA can establish that the Anti-Doping Rule Violation
was intentional.

10.2.2 If Article 10.2.1 does not apply, then (subject to Article 10.2.4.1)
the period of Ineligibility will be two years.

10.2.3 As used in Article 10.2, the term 'intentional' is meant to identify

those Players or other Persons who engage in conduct that
they knew constituted an Anti-Doping Rule Violation or knew
that there was a significant risk that the conduct might
constitute or result in an Anti-Doping Rule Violation and
manifestly disregarded that risk.

10.2.3.1 An Anti-Doping Rule Violation resulting from an

Adverse Analytical Finding for a Prohibited
Substance or a Prohibited Method that is only
prohibited In-Competition will be rebuttably
presumed to be not 'intentional' if the Prohibited
Substance is a Specified Substance or the Prohibited
Method is a Specified Method and the Player can
establish that the Prohibited Substance was Used
Out-of-Competition.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 76

 10.2.3.2 An Anti-Doping Rule Violation resulting from an
Adverse Analytical Finding for a Prohibited
Substance or a Prohibited Method that is only
prohibited In-Competition will not be considered
'intentional' if the Prohibited Substance is a Specified
Substance or the Prohibited Method is a Specified
Method and the Player can establish that the
Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method was
Used Out-of-Competition in a context unrelated to
sport performance.
[Comment to Article 10.2.3: Unless otherwise specified in this
Programme or the Code, 'intentional' means that the Person intended to
commit the act that forms the basis of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation
regardless of whether the Person knew that such act constituted a violation
of this Programme or the Code].

10.2.4 Notwithstanding any other provision in Article 10.2, where the

Anti-Doping Rule Violation involves a Substance of Abuse:

10.2.4.1 If the Player can establish that any ingestion or Use

occurred Out-of-Competition and was unrelated to
sport performance, the period of Ineligibility will be
three months, provided that it may be further reduced
to one month if the Player satisfactorily completes a
Substance of Abuse treatment program approved by
the ITIA. The period of Ineligibility established in this
Article 10.2.4.1 is not subject to any reduction based
on any provision in Article 10.6.

10.2.4.2 If the ingestion, Use, or Possession occurred In-

Competition, and the Player can establish that the
context of the ingestion, Use, or Possession was
unrelated to sport performance, then the ingestion,
Use, or Possession will not be considered intentional
for purposes of Article 10.2.1 and will not provide a
basis for a finding of Aggravating Circumstances
under Article 10.4.

10.3 Imposition of a period of Ineligibility for other Anti-Doping Rule

Violations

The period of Ineligibility for Anti-Doping Rule Violations other than as

provided in Article 10.2 will be as follows, unless Articles 10.6, or 10.7
are applicable:

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 77

10.3.1 For an Anti-Doping Rule Violation under Article 2.3 or 2.5 that
is the Player's or other Person's first doping offence, the period
of Ineligibility imposed will be four years except:

10.3.1.1 in the case of failing to submit to Sample collection,

if the Player can establish that the commission of the
Anti-Doping Rule Violation was not intentional, the
period of Ineligibility will be two years;

10.3.1.2 in all other cases, if the Player or other Person can

establish exceptional circumstances that justify a
reduction of the period of Ineligibility, the period of
Ineligibility will be in a range from two years to four
years depending on the Player’s or other Person's
degree of Fault; or

10.3.1.3 in a case involving a Protected Person or

Recreational Athlete, the period of Ineligibility will be
in a range between a maximum of two years and, at
a minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility,
depending on the Protected Person's or Recreational
Athlete’s degree of Fault.

10.3.2 For an Article 2.4 Anti-Doping Rule Violation that is the Player's
first doping offence, the period of Ineligibility imposed will be
two years, subject to reduction down to a minimum of one year,
depending on the Player's degree of Fault. The flexibility
between two years and one year of Ineligibility in this Article is
not available where a pattern of last-minute whereabouts
changes or other conduct raises a serious suspicion that the
Player was trying to avoid being available for Testing.

10.3.3 For an Article 2.7 or 2.8 Anti-Doping Rule Violation that is the
Player's or other Person's first doping offence, the period of
Ineligibility imposed will be a minimum of four years up to
lifetime Ineligibility, depending on the seriousness of the
violation, provided that:

10.3.3.1 An Article 2.7 or 2.8 Anti-Doping Rule Violation

involving a Protected Person will be considered a
particularly serious violation and, if committed by
Player Support Personnel in relation to violations not
solely involving Specified Substances or Specified
Methods, will result in lifetime Ineligibility for such
Player Support Personnel.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 78

 10.3.3.2 Significant Article 2.7 or 2.8 Anti-Doping Rule
Violations that may also violate non-sporting laws
and regulations will be reported to the competent
administrative, professional or judicial authorities.

10.3.4 For an Article 2.9 Anti-Doping Rule Violation that is the Player's
or other Person's first doping offence, the period of Ineligibility
imposed will be a minimum of two years, up to lifetime
Ineligibility, depending on the seriousness of the violation.

10.3.5 For an Article 2.10 Anti-Doping Rule Violation that is the

Player's or other Person's first doping offence, the period of
Ineligibility will be two years, subject to reduction down to a
minimum of one year, depending on the Player's or other
Person's degree of Fault and other circumstances of the case.

10.3.6 For an Article 2.11 Anti-Doping Rule Violation, the period of

Ineligibility will be a minimum of two years, up to lifetime
Ineligibility, depending on the seriousness of the violation.

10.4 Aggravating Circumstances that may increase the period of

Ineligibility

If the ITIA establishes, in an individual case involving an Anti-Doping

Rule Violation under Article 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6 or 2.10, that
Aggravating Circumstances are present that justify the imposition of a
period of Ineligibility greater than the standard sanction otherwise
applicable in accordance with Article 10.2 or 10.3, the period of
Ineligibility otherwise applicable will be increased by an additional
period of Ineligibility of up to two years depending on the seriousness
of the violation and the nature of the Aggravating Circumstances, unless
the Player or other Person can establish that they did not knowingly
commit the Anti-Doping Rule Violation.

10.5 Elimination of the period of Ineligibility where there is No Fault or

Negligence

If a Player or other Person establishes in an individual case that they

bear No Fault or Negligence for the Anti-Doping Rule Violation, the
otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility will be eliminated.

10.6 Reduction of the period of Ineligibility based on No Significant

Fault or Negligence

10.6.1 Reduction of Sanctions in particular circumstances for Anti-

Doping Rule Violations under Article 2.1, 2.2 or 2.6:

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 79

 All reductions under Article 10.6.1 are mutually exclusive and
not cumulative.

10.6.1.1 Specified Substances or Specified Methods

Where the Anti-Doping Rule Violation involves a

Specified Substance (other than a Substance of
Abuse) or Specified Method, and the Player or other
Person can establish that they bear No Significant
Fault or Negligence for the violation, the period of
Ineligibility will be, at a minimum, a reprimand and no
period of Ineligibility, and at a maximum, two years of
Ineligibility, depending on the Player's or other
Person's degree of Fault.

10.6.1.2 Contaminated Products

In cases involving a Prohibited Substance that is not

a Substance of Abuse, where the Player or other
Person can establish both No Significant Fault or
Negligence for the violation and that the Prohibited
Substance came from a Contaminated Product, the
period of Ineligibility will be, at a minimum, a
reprimand and no period of Ineligibility, and at a
maximum, two years Ineligibility, depending on the
Player's or other Person’s degree of Fault.

10.6.1.3 Protected Persons or Recreational Athletes

Except for Anti-Doping Rule Violations involving

Substances of Abuse, where the Anti-Doping Rule
Violation is committed by a Protected Person or
Recreational Athlete, and they can establish that they
bear No Significant Fault or Negligence for the
violation, the period of Ineligibility will be, at a
minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility,
and at a maximum, two years Ineligibility, depending
on the Protected Person's or Recreational Athlete's
degree of Fault.

10.6.2 Application of No Significant Fault or Negligence beyond Article

10.6.1:

In an individual case where Article 10.6.1 is not applicable, if a

Player or other Person establishes that they bear No

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 80

 Significant Fault or Negligence for the violation, then (subject
to further reduction or elimination as provided in Article 10.7)
the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be reduced
based on the Player's or other Person's degree of Fault, but the
reduced period of Ineligibility may not be less than one-half of
the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable. If the otherwise
applicable period of Ineligibility is a lifetime, the reduced period
may be no less than eight years.

10.7 Elimination, reduction, or suspension of the period of Ineligibility

and/or other Consequences for reasons unrelated to Fault

10.7.1 Substantial Assistance in discovering or establishing Code

violations:

10.7.1.1 Prior to an appellate decision under Article 13 or the

expiration of the time to appeal, the ITIA may
suspend a part of the Consequences (other than
Disqualification and mandatory Public Disclosure)
imposed in an individual case where the Player or
other Person has provided Substantial Assistance to
the ITIA, other Anti-Doping Organisation, criminal
authority or professional disciplinary body that results
in:

(a) the ITIA or other Anti-Doping Organisation

discovering or bringing forward an Anti-Doping
Rule Violation by another Person; or

(b) a criminal authority or disciplinary body

discovering or bringing forward a criminal
offence or a breach of professional rules
committed by another Person and the
information provided by the Person providing
Substantial Assistance is made available to the
ITIA or other Anti-Doping Organisation with
Results Management responsibility;

(c) WADA initiating a proceeding against a

Signatory, WADA-accredited laboratory, or
Athlete Passport Management Unit (as defined
in the ISL) for non-compliance with the Code, an
International Standard, or a Technical
Document; or

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 81

 (d) (with the approval by WADA) a criminal or
disciplinary body bringing forward a criminal
offence or a breach of professional or sport
rules arising out of a sport integrity violation
other than doping.

After an appellate decision under Article 13 or the

expiration of time to appeal, the ITIA may only
suspend a part of the otherwise applicable
Consequences (other than Disqualification and
mandatory Public Disclosure) with the approval of
WADA.

10.7.1.2 The extent to which the otherwise applicable period

of Ineligibility may be suspended will be based on the
seriousness of the Anti-Doping Rule Violation
committed by the Player or other Person and the
significance of the Substantial Assistance provided
by the Player or other Person to the effort to eliminate
doping in sport, non-compliance with the Code,
and/or sport integrity violations. No more than three-
quarters of the otherwise applicable period of
Ineligibility may be suspended. If the otherwise
applicable period of Ineligibility is a lifetime, the non-
suspended period under this Article must be no less
than eight years. For purposes of this paragraph, the
otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility will not
include any period of Ineligibility that could be added
under Article 10.9.4.2.

Where requested by the Player or other Person, the

ITIA will allow the Player or other Person to provide
Substantial Assistance to it subject to a Without
Prejudice Agreement.

If the Player or other Person fails to continue to

cooperate and to provide the complete and credible
Substantial Assistance upon which a suspension of
Consequences was based, the ITIA will reinstate the
original Consequences. A decision by the ITIA to
reinstate or not to reinstate suspended
Consequences may be appealed pursuant to Article
13.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 82

10.7.1.3 To further encourage Players and other Persons to
provide Substantial Assistance, at the request of the
ITIA or at the request of the Player or other Person
who has, or has been asserted to have, committed
an Anti-Doping Rule Violation or other violation of the
Code, WADA may agree at any stage of the Results
Management process, including after an appellate
decision under Article 13, to what it considers to be
an appropriate suspension of the otherwise-
applicable period of Ineligibility and other
Consequences. In exceptional circumstances,
WADA may agree to suspensions of the period of
Ineligibility and other Consequences for Substantial
Assistance greater than those otherwise provided in
this Article, or even to no period of Ineligibility, no
mandatory Public Disclosure, and/or no return of
Prize Money or payment of fines or costs. WADA's
approval will be subject to reinstatement of
Consequences as otherwise provided in this Article.
Notwithstanding Article 13, WADA's decisions in the
context of this Article may not be appealed.

10.7.1.4 If the ITIA suspends any part of an otherwise

applicable Consequence because of Substantial
Assistance, notice providing justification for the
decision will be provided to Interested Parties. In
unique circumstances where WADA determines that
it would be in the best interests of anti-doping, WADA
may authorise the ITIA to enter into appropriate
confidentiality agreements limiting or delaying the
disclosure of the Substantial Assistance agreement
or the nature of Substantial Assistance being
provided.

10.7.1.5 Where the ITIA declines to exercise the discretion

conferred on it by this Article 10.7.1, and the matter
comes before a hearing panel under Article 8 or an
appeal panel under Article 13, the hearing
panel/appeal panel (as applicable) may exercise
such discretion if the conditions of Article 10.7.1.1 are
satisfied and the hearing panel/appeal panel sees fit.
Alternatively, the hearing panel/appeal panel may
consider a submission that the ITIA, in exercising its
discretion under this Article 10.7.1,

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 83

 should have suspended a greater part of the
Consequences.

10.7.2 Admission of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation in the absence of

other evidence:

Where a Player or other Person voluntarily admits the

commission of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation before receiving
either (a) notification of a Sample collection that could establish
the Anti-Doping Rule Violation (in the case of an Article 2.1
Anti-Doping Rule Violation), or (b) a Notice (in the case of any
other Anti-Doping Rule Violation), and that admission is the
only reliable evidence of the violation at the time of the
admission, the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may
be reduced by up to but not by more than 50%.

10.7.3 Application of multiple grounds for reduction of a sanction:

Where a Player or other Person establishes entitlement to a

reduction in sanction under more than one provision of Article
10.6, or 10.7, before applying any reduction or suspension
under Article 10.7, the otherwise applicable period of
Ineligibility will be determined in accordance with Articles 10.2,
10.3, and 10.6. If the Player or other Person establishes
entitlement to a reduction or suspension of the period of
Ineligibility under Article 10.7, the period of Ineligibility may be
reduced or suspended, but not below one-fourth of the
otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility.

10.8 Results Management agreements

10.8.1 One year reduction for certain Anti-Doping Rule Violations

based on early admission and acceptance of sanction:

Where the ITIA sends a Player or other Person a Charge Letter

for an Anti-Doping Rule Violation that carries an asserted
period of Ineligibility of four or more years (including any period
of Ineligibility asserted under Article 10.4), if the Player or other
Person admits the violation and accepts the asserted period of
Ineligibility no later than 20 days after receiving the Charge
Letter, they will receive a one year reduction in the period of
Ineligibility asserted by the ITIA. Where the Player or other
Person receives the one year reduction in the asserted period
of Ineligibility under this Article 10.8.1, no further reduction in

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 84

 the asserted period of Ineligibility will be allowed under any
other Article.

10.8.2 Case resolution agreements:

10.8.2.1 Where the Player or other Person admits an Anti-

Doping Rule Violation after being confronted with it
by the ITIA and agrees to Consequences acceptable
to the ITIA and WADA, at their sole discretion:

(a) the Player or other Person may receive a

reduction in the period of Ineligibility based on
an assessment by the ITIA and WADA of the
application of Articles 10.1 through 10.7 to the
asserted Anti-Doping Rule Violation, the
seriousness of the violation, the Player's or
other Person's degree of Fault, and how
promptly the Player or other Person admitted
the violation; and

(b) the period of Ineligibility may start as early as

the date of Sample collection or the date on
which another Anti-Doping Rule Violation last
occurred.

In each case, however, where this Article is applied,

the Player or other Person must serve at least one-
half of the agreed-upon period of Ineligibility going
forward from the earlier of (1) the date the Player or
other Person accepted the imposition of a period of
Ineligibility; and (2) the date the Player or other
Person accepted a Provisional Suspension that was
subsequently respected by the Player or other
Person. The decision by WADA and the ITIA to enter
or not enter into a case resolution agreement, and
the amount of the reduction to, and the starting date
of, the period of Ineligibility agreed, are not matters
that may be determined or reviewed by a hearing
body and are not subject to appeal under Article 13.

10.8.2.2 If so requested by the Player or other Person seeking

to enter into a case resolution agreement under this
Article, the ITIA will allow the Player or other Person
to discuss an admission of the Anti-Doping Rule

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 85

 Violation with it subject to a Without Prejudice
Agreement.

10.9 Multiple violations

10.9.1 Second Anti-Doping Rule Violation:

For a Player's or other Person's second Anti-Doping Rule

Violation, the period of Ineligibility will be the greater of:

10.9.1.1 a six month period of Ineligibility; and

10.9.1.2 a period of Ineligibility in the range between:

(a) the sum of the period of Ineligibility imposed for

the first Anti-Doping Rule Violation plus the
period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable to the
second Anti-Doping Rule Violation treated as if
it were a first violation; and

(b) twice the period of Ineligibility otherwise

applicable to the second Anti-Doping Rule
Violation treated as if it were a first violation.

The period of Ineligibility within this range will be determined

based on the entirety of the circumstances and the Player's or
other Person's degree of Fault with respect to the second
violation. The period of Ineligibility established in this Article
10.9.1 may then be further reduced by the application of Article
10.7.

10.9.2 Third Anti-Doping Rule Violation:

A third Anti-Doping Rule Violation will always result in a lifetime

period of Ineligibility, unless it fulfils the conditions for reduction
of the period of Ineligibility under Article 10.6, or involves a
violation of Article 2.4. In these particular cases, the period of
Ineligibility will be from eight years to lifetime Ineligibility.

The period of Ineligibility established in this Article 10.9.2 may

then be further reduced by the application of Article 10.7.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 86

10.9.3 The following will not be considered a violation for purposes of
this Article 10.9:

10.9.3.1 An Anti-Doping Rule Violation for which the Player or

other Person in question has established that they
bore No Fault or Negligence.

10.9.3.2 An Anti-Doping Rule Violation sanctioned under

Article 10.2.4.1.

10.9.4 Additional rules for certain potential multiple offences:

10.9.4.1 For purposes of imposing sanctions under Article

10.9, except as provided in Articles 10.9.4.2 and
10.9.4.3, an Anti-Doping Rule Violation will only be
considered a second (or third, as applicable) Anti-
Doping Rule Violation if the ITIA can establish that
the Player or other Person committed the additional
Anti-Doping Rule Violation after they received notice
of the first (or the second, as applicable) Anti-Doping
Rule Violation. Otherwise, the first and second Anti-
Doping Rule Violations (or the second and third Anti-
Doping Rule Violations, as applicable) will be
considered together as one single first Anti-Doping
Rule Violation, and the sanction imposed will be
based on the Anti-Doping Rule Violation that carries
the more severe sanction, including the application
of Aggravating Circumstances. Results in all
Competitions dating back to the earlier Anti-Doping
Rule Violation will be Disqualified as provided in
Article 10.10.

10.9.4.2 If the ITIA establishes that a Player or other Person

committed an additional Anti-Doping Rule Violation
prior to notification, and that the additional violation
occurred 12 months or more before or after the first-
noticed violation, the period of Ineligibility for the
additional violation will be calculated as if the
additional violation were a stand-alone first violation,
and this period of Ineligibility must be served
consecutively (rather than concurrently) with the
period of Ineligibility imposed for the first-noticed
violation. Where this Article 10.9.4.2 applies, the
violations taken together will constitute a single
violation for purposes of Articles 10.9.1 and 10.9.2.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 87

 10.9.4.3 If the ITIA establishes that a Player or other Person
committed an Article 2.5 Anti-Doping Rule Violation
in connection with the Doping Control process for an
underlying asserted Anti-Doping Rule Violation, the
Article 2.5 Anti-Doping Rule Violation will be treated
as a stand-alone first violation and the period of
Ineligibility for such violation must be served
consecutively (rather than concurrently) with the
period of Ineligibility, if any, imposed for the
underlying Anti-Doping Rule Violation. Where this
Article 10.9.4.3 is applied, the violations taken
together will constitute a single violation for purposes
of Articles 10.9.1 and 10.9.2.

10.9.4.4 If the ITIA establishes that a Player or other Person

has committed a second or third Anti-Doping Rule
Violation during a period of Ineligibility, the periods of
Ineligibility for the multiple violations will run
consecutively (rather than concurrently).

10.9.5 Multiple Anti-Doping Rule Violations during a ten year period:

Any prior Anti-Doping Rule Violation will only be taken into

account for purposes of Article 10.9 if it took place within ten
years of the Anti-Doping Rule Violation under consideration.

10.10 Disqualification of results in Competitions subsequent to Sample

collection or commission of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation

Unless fairness requires otherwise, in addition to the Disqualification of

results under Articles 9.1 and 10.1, any other results obtained by the
Player in Competitions taking place in the period starting on the date
the Sample in question was collected or other Anti-Doping Rule
Violation occurred and ending on the commencement of any Provisional
Suspension or Ineligibility period, will be Disqualified, with all of the

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 88

 resulting consequences, including forfeiture of any medals, titles,
ranking points and Prize Money).

10.11 Forfeited Prize Money and readjustment

10.11.1 If the ITIA recovers Prize Money forfeited as a result of an Anti-

Doping Rule Violation, it will use it to defray the costs of
operating the Programme.

10.11.2 There will be no readjustment of medals, titles, or ranking

points for any Player who lost to a Player subsequently found
to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation, except where
provision is made for such readjustment in the regulations of
the relevant Competition.

10.12 Financial Consequences

10.12.1 Where a Player or other Person commits an Anti-Doping Rule

Violation, upon request by the ITIA the Independent Tribunal
may order the Player or other Person to pay some or all of the
costs associated with the Anti-Doping Rule Violation (including,
without limitation, those incurred by the ITIA in investigating or
otherwise conducting Results Management in relation to the
matter), regardless of the period of Ineligibility imposed (if any).

10.12.2 The imposition of a costs order will not be considered a basis

for reducing the period of Ineligibility or other Consequences
that would otherwise be applicable under this Programme.

10.13 Commencement of Ineligibility period

Where a Player or other Person is already serving a period of Ineligibility

for an Anti-Doping Rule Violation, any new period of Ineligibility will start
on the first day after the current period of Ineligibility has been served.
Otherwise, the period of Ineligibility will start on the date of the final
decision providing for Ineligibility, or (if the hearing is waived, or there is
no hearing) on the date Ineligibility is accepted or otherwise imposed,
save as follows:

10.13.1 Delays not attributable to the Player or other Person:

Where there have been substantial delays in the hearing

process or other aspects of Doping Control, and the Player or
other Person can establish that such delays are not attributable
to the Player or other Person, the period of Ineligibility may be
deemed to have started at an earlier date, commencing as

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 89

 early as the date of Sample collection or the date on which
another Anti-Doping Rule Violation last occurred. All
competitive results achieved during the period of Ineligibility,
including retroactive Ineligibility, will be Disqualified.

10.13.2 Credit for any Provisional Suspension or period of Ineligibility

served:

10.13.2.1 Any period of Provisional Suspension (whether

imposed or voluntarily accepted) that has been
respected by the Player or other Person will be
credited against the total period of Ineligibility to be
served. If a period of Ineligibility is served pursuant to
a decision that is subsequently appealed, then the
Player or other Person shall receive a credit for such
period of Ineligibility served against any period of
Ineligibility which may ultimately be imposed on
appeal.

10.13.2.2 To get credit for any period of voluntary Provisional

Suspension, however, the Player or other Person
must have given written notice at the beginning of
such period to the ITIA, in a form acceptable to the
ITIA (and the ITIA will promptly provide a copy of that
written notice to each Interested Party) and must
have respected the Provisional Suspension in full.

10.13.2.3 No credit against a period of Ineligibility will be given

for any time period before the effective date of the
Provisional Suspension (whether imposed or
voluntarily accepted), regardless of whether the
Player elected not to compete or was suspended by
their team.

10.13.3 For purposes of forfeiture of ranking points, the decision will

come into effect at midnight on the Sunday nearest to the date
that the decision is issued.

10.14 Status during Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension

10.14.1 Prohibition against participation during Ineligibility or

Provisional Suspension:

While serving a period of Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension,

a Player or other Person may not participate in any capacity in

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 90

 (or assist any Player participating in any capacity in):

(a) any Covered Event;

(b) any other Event or Competition or activity (other than
authorised anti-doping education or rehabilitation
programmes) authorised, organised or sanctioned by
the ITF, the ATP, the WTA, any National Association
or member of a National Association, or any Signatory,
Signatory's member organisation, or club or member
organisation of that Signatory's member organisation;

(c) any Event or Competition authorised or organised by

any professional league or any international or
national-level Event or Competition organisation; or

(d) any elite or national-level sporting activity funded by a

governmental agency.

10.14.2 Without prejudice to the generality of Article 10.14.1, a Player

or other Person may not, during any period of Ineligibility or
Provisional Suspension, be given accreditation for, or
otherwise granted access to, any Covered Event or any other
Event or Competition or activity authorised, organised or
sanctioned by the ITF, the ATP, the WTA, any National
Association or member of a National Association, and any such
accreditation previously issued will be withdrawn.

10.14.3 Where an Event that will or may take place after the period of
Ineligibility has an entry deadline that falls during the period of
Ineligibility, the Player may submit an application for entry in
the Event in accordance with that deadline, notwithstanding
that at the time of such application they are still Ineligible.

10.14.4 While serving a period of Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension,

a Player will remain subject to Testing and must provide
whereabouts information for that purpose upon demand by the
ITIA.

10.14.5 The only exceptions to Article 10.14.1 are as follows:

10.14.5.1 A Player or other Person who is subject to a period
of Ineligibility longer than four years may, after
completing four years of the period of Ineligibility,
participate as a Player in local sport events not
sanctioned or otherwise under the authority of a

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 91

 Code Signatory or member of a Code Signatory, but
only so long as the local sports events are not at a
level that could otherwise qualify such Player or other
Person directly or indirectly to compete in (or
accumulate points towards) a national championship
or International Event, and does not involve the
Player or other Person working in any capacity with
Protected Persons; and

10.14.5.2 A Player may return to train as part of a team or to

use the facilities of a club or other member
organisation of a National Association or of a
Signatory's member organisation during the shorter
of: (1) the last two months of the Player's period of
Ineligibility, and (2) the last one-quarter of the period
of Ineligibility.

10.14.6 In addition, except where the Anti-Doping Rule Violation

involved an eliminated or reduced sanction further to Article
10.5 or 10.6, some or all financial support or benefits (if any)
that might have otherwise been provided to the Player or other
Person will be withheld by the ITF/ITIA or any National
Association.

10.14.7 If a Player or other Person violates the prohibition against

participation set out in Article 10.14.1, any results they obtain
during such participation will be Disqualified, with all resulting
consequences, including forfeiture of any medals, titles,
ranking points and Prize Money, and a new period of
Ineligibility equal in length to the original period of Ineligibility
will be added to the end of the original period of Ineligibility. The
new period of Ineligibility may be adjusted based on the
Player's or other Person's degree of Fault and other
circumstances of the case (and so may include a reprimand
and no period of Ineligibility). The determination of whether a
Player or other Person has violated the prohibition against
participation, and whether the new period of Ineligibility should
be adjusted, will be made by the Anti-Doping Organisation that
brought the case that led to the initial period of Ineligibility. This
decision may be appealed pursuant to Article 13.

A Player or other Person who violates the prohibition against

participation during a Provisional Suspension set out in Article
10.14.1 will receive no credit for any period of Provisional

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 92

 Suspension served and any results they obtain during such
participation will be Disqualified, with all resulting
consequences, including forfeiture of any medals, titles,
ranking points and Prize Money.
[Comment to Article 10.14.7: If the Player or other Person does not
accept the new period of Ineligibility (or, if applicable, reprimand)
proposed by the ITIA (or other Anti-Doping Organisation), the matter
will proceed to a hearing in accordance with Article 11.1 of the
International Standard for Results Management.]

10.14.8 Where a Player Support Person or other Person assists a

Person in violating the prohibition against participation during
Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension, the ITIA (or the Anti-
Doping Organisation with jurisdiction over such Player Support
Person or other Person) will pursue the matter as a potential
Article 2.9 Anti-Doping Rule Violation in accordance with Article
7.8.

10.15 Automatic publication of Consequences

A mandatory Consequence in every case where an Anti-Doping Rule

Violation has been committed will be automatic publication, as provided
in Articles 8.6 and 13.11.

10.16 Conditions of reinstatement

10.16.1 As a condition of reinstatement, a Player who is subject to a

period of Ineligibility must respect the conditions of Article
10.14.4, failing which the Player will not be eligible for
reinstatement until they have made themselves available for
Testing (by notifying the ITIA and ITF in writing) for a period of
time equal to the period of Ineligibility remaining as at the date
they first stopped making themselves available for Testing,
except that in the event that a Player retires while subject to a
period of Ineligibility, the conditions set out in Article 1.4.5 will
apply.

10.16.2 The ITIA may also make reinstatement subject to the review
and approval of a Player's medical condition by the Review
Board in order to establish the Player's fitness to be reinstated.
10.16.3 Once the period of a Player's Ineligibility has expired, and the
Player has fulfilled the foregoing conditions of reinstatement,
then provided that (subject to Article 10.16.5) all amounts
forfeited under the Programme have been paid in full, and any
award of costs made against the Player by the Independent

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 93

 Tribunal further to Article 8.5.4 and/or by the CAS following any
appeal made pursuant to Article 13.2 has been satisfied in full,
the Player will become automatically re-eligible and no
application by the Player for reinstatement will be necessary.
If, however, further amounts become due after a Player's
period of Ineligibility has expired (as a result of an instalment
plan established pursuant to Article 10.16.5), then any failure
by the Player to pay all outstanding amounts on or before their
respective due dates will render the Player automatically
Ineligible to participate in further Covered Events until all
amounts due are paid in full.

10.16.4 Even if no period of Ineligibility is imposed, a Player may not

participate in a Covered Event while any Prize Money ordered
or agreed to be forfeit under the Programme, and/or any award
of costs against the Player, remains unpaid, unless an
instalment plan has been established pursuant to Article
10.16.5 and the Player has made all payments due under that
plan. If any instalment(s) become(s) overdue under that plan,
the Player may not participate in any Covered Event until such
overdue instalments are paid in full.

10.16.5 Where fairness requires, the ITIA or the hearing panel may
establish an instalment plan for repayment of any Prize Money
forfeited under this Programme and/or for payment of any costs
awarded further to Article 8.5.4. The payment schedule may
extend beyond any period of Ineligibility imposed upon the
Player.

11. Consequences for Teams

The Consequences for a team entered in a Competition of the

commission of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation by a Player in their
capacity as a member of that team will be as set out in the rules relating
to that Competition, in accordance with Code Article 11.

12. Sanctions against National Associations

12.1 The ITF will require its National Associations to comply with, implement,
uphold, and/or enforce this Programme (or its equivalent rules) within
the National Association's area of competence, and will take such
actions as it considers necessary to enforce such compliance.

13. Results Management: appeals

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 94

13.1 Decisions subject to appeal

Decisions made under this Programme may be appealed only as set

out in this Article 13 or as otherwise provided in the Code
orInternational Standards or this Programme. Such decisions will
remain in effect while under appeal unless the appellate body orders
otherwise.

13.2 Appeals from decisions regarding Anti-Doping Rule Violations,

Consequences, Provisional Suspensions, implementation of
decisions and authority

The following decisions may be appealed as provided in Articles 13.2

to 13.9: a decision that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation has been
committed; a decision imposing (or not imposing) Consequences for an
Anti-Doping Rule Violation (save as provided in Article 13.4); a decision
that no Anti-Doping Rule Violation has been committed; a decision that
a case cannot go forward for procedural reasons (including, for
example, because of prescription); a decision by WADA to grant or not
to grant an exception to the six month notice requirement for a retired
Player to return to competition under Article 1.4.4; a decision by WADA
assigning Results Management responsibility under Code Article 7.1; a
decision by the ITIA not to bring forward an Adverse Analytical Finding
or an Atypical Finding or an Adverse Passport Finding as an Anti-
Doping Rule Violation, or a decision not to assert an Anti-Doping Rule
Violation after an investigation in accordance with the ISRM; a decision
to impose (or lift) a Provisional Suspension as a result of a provisional
hearing; a failure by the ITIA to comply with Article 7.12.1; a decision
that the ITIA or the Independent Tribunal lacks authority to rule on an
alleged Anti-Doping Rule Violation or its Consequences; a decision to
suspend (or not suspend) Consequences or to reinstate (or not
reinstate) Consequences under Article 10.7.1; failure to comply with
Code Articles 7.1.4 and 7.1.5; failure to comply with Article 10.8.1; a
decision under Article 10.14.7; a decision by the ITF/ITIA not to
implement another Anti-Doping Organisation's decision in accordance
with Code Article 15.1 (this appeal will be expedited); and a decision
under Code Article 27.3.

13.2.1 Appeals involving Covered Events or Players who are

International-Level Players:

In cases arising from participation in a Covered Event or in

cases involving International-Level Players, the decision may
be appealed exclusively to CAS.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 95

13.2.2 Appeals involving other Players or other Persons:

In cases where Article 13.2.1 is not applicable, the decision

may be appealed to an appellate body in accordance with rules
adopted by the NADO having authority over the Player or other
Person. The rules for such appeal must respect the following
principles: a timely hearing; a fair, impartial, Operationally
Independent and Institutionally Independent hearing panel; the
right to be represented by counsel at the person’s own
expense; and a timely, written, reasoned decision. If no such
body is in place and available at the time of the appeal, the
decision may be appealed to the CAS Anti-Doping Division,
which will hear and determine the case in accordance with the
Code-compliant anti-doping rules of the NADO, the CAS Code
of Sports-related Arbitration, and the Arbitration Rules for the
CAS Anti-Doping Division.

13.2.3 Persons entitled to appeal:

13.2.3.1 In cases under Article 13.2.1, the following parties

will have the right to appeal to the CAS:

(a) the Player or other Person who is the subject of

the decision being appealed;

(b) the other party to the case in which the decision

was rendered;

(c) the ITIA (on behalf of the ITF);

(d) the NADO(s) of the Player's or other Person's

country of residence or countries where the
Player or other Person is a national or licence-
holder;

(e) the International Olympic Committee or

International Paralympic Committee, as
applicable, where the decision may have an
effect in relation to (respectively) the Olympic
Games or Paralympic Games, including
decisions affecting eligibility for (respectively)
the Olympic Games or Paralympic Games;
and/or

(f) WADA.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 96

13.2.3.2 In cases under Article 13.2.2, the parties having the
right to appeal will be as provided in the NADO's
rules but, at a minimum, will include the following
parties:

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 97

 (a) the Player or other Person who is the subject of
the decision being appealed;

(b) the other party to the case in which the decision

was rendered;

(c) the ITIA (on behalf of the ITF);

(d) the NADO of the person’s country of residence

or countries where the Person is a national or
licence holder;

(e) the International Olympic Committee or

International Paralympic Committee, as
applicable, where the decision may have an
effect in relation to (respectively) the Olympic
Games or Paralympic Games, including
decisions affecting eligibility for (respectively)
the Olympic Games or Paralympic Games; and

(f) WADA.

Further, for cases under Article 13.2.2, WADA, the

International Olympic Committee, the International
Paralympic Committee and the ITIA (on behalf of the
ITF) will also have the right to appeal to the CAS
Appeals Division with respect to the decision of the
national-level appeal body (or CAS Anti-Doping
Division, as applicable). Any party filing an appeal will
be entitled to assistance from CAS to obtain all relevant
information from the Anti-Doping Organisation whose
decision is being appealed and the information will be
provided if CAS so directs
13.3 Duty to notify

All parties to any CAS appeal must ensure that WADA and all other
parties with a right to appeal have been given timely notice of the
appeal.

13.4 Appeal from imposition of Provisional Suspension

13.4.1 A Player or other Person who has been Provisionally

Suspended has the right to an expedited appeal in accordance
with Articles 13.2 to 13.9. The Provisional Suspension will
remain in effect pending the appeal.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 98

 13.4.2 Notwithstanding Article 13.2, there will be no right to appeal a
decision imposing (or not lifting) a Provisional Suspension on
the ground that the violation is likely to have involved a
Contaminated Product.

13.5 Appeals against decisions pursuant to Article 12

Decisions rendered pursuant to Article 12 may be appealed exclusively

to the CAS (Appeals Division) by the National Association or other body.

13.6 Failure to render a timely decision

Where, in a particular case, a decision under this Programme with

respect to whether an Anti-Doping Rule Violation was committed is not
rendered within a reasonable deadline set by WADA, WADA may elect
to appeal directly to CAS as if a decision finding no Anti-Doping Rule
Violation had been rendered. If the CAS determines that an Anti-Doping
Rule Violation was committed and that WADA acted reasonably in
electing to appeal directly to the CAS, WADA's reasonable costs and
legal fees in prosecuting the appeal will be reimbursed to WADA by the
ITIA.

13.7 Appeals relating to TUEs

TUE decisions may be appealed exclusively as provided in Article 4.4.

13.8 Time for filing appeals

13.8.1 Appeals to CAS:

13.8.1.1 The deadline for filing an appeal to the CAS will be

21 days from the date of receipt of the reasoned
decision in question by the appealing party. Where
the appellant is a party other than the ITIA, to be a
valid filing under this Article 13.8.1 a copy of the
appeal must be filed on the same day with the ITIA.
The foregoing notwithstanding, the following will
apply in connection with appeals filed by a party that
is entitled to appeal but that was not a party to the
proceedings that led to the decision being appealed

(a) Within 15 days from the notice of the reasoned

decision, such party/ies will have the right to
request a copy of the full case file from the body
that issued the decision.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 99

 (b) If such a request is made within the 15-day
period, the party making such request will have
21 days from receipt of the file to appeal to the
CAS.

13.8.1.2 Appeals by the ITIA:

The above notwithstanding, the filing deadline for an

appeal or intervention filed by the ITIA will be the later
of:

(a) 21 days after the last day on which any other

party having a right to appeal (other than
WADA) could have appealed; or

(b) 21 days after the ITIA’s receipt of the complete

file relating to the decision.

13.8.1.3 The above notwithstanding, the filing deadline for an

appeal by WADA will be the later of:

(a) 21 days after the last day on which any other

party having a right to appeal could have
appealed; and

(b) 21 days after WADA's receipt of the complete

file relating to the decision.

13.8.2 Appeals under Article 13.2.2:

13.8.2.1 The time to file an appeal to an independent and

impartial body in accordance with rules established
by the NADO will be indicated by the rules of the
NADO.

13.8.2.2 The above notwithstanding, the filing deadline for an

appeal filed by WADA will be the later of:

(a) 21 days after the last day on which any other

party having a right of appeal could have
appealed; or

(b) 21 days after WADA's receipt of the complete

file relating to the decision.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 100

13.9 Appeal procedure

13.9.1 Scope of review not limited:

The scope of review on appeal includes all issues relevant to

the matter and is expressly not limited to the issues or scope of
review before the initial decision maker. Any party to the appeal
may submit evidence, legal arguments, and claims that were
not raised in the first instance hearing so long as they arise
from the same cause of action or same general facts or
circumstances raised or addressed in the first instance hearing.

13.9.2 CAS will not defer to the findings being appealed:

In making its decision, the CAS will not give deference to the
discretion exercised by the body whose decision is being
appealed.

13.9.3 WADA not required to exhaust internal remedies:

Where WADA has a right to appeal under Article 13 and no

other party has appealed a final decision within the process
under this Programme, WADA may appeal such decision
directly to the CAS without having to exhaust any other
remedies under this Programme.

13.9.4 Cross appeals and other subsequent appeals allowed:

Cross appeals and other subsequent appeals by any

respondent named in cases brought to the CAS under this
Programme are specifically permitted. Any party with a right to
appeal under this Article 13 must file a cross appeal or
subsequent appeal at the latest with its answer to the appeal.

13.10 Notification of appeal decisions

The ITIA must promptly provide the appeal decision to the Player or
other Person and to any Interested Party.

13.11 Publication of appeal decisions

13.11.1 A decision on appeal that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation has

been committed or that the prohibition against participation
during Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension has been violated
may be Publicly Disclosed immediately, and must be Publicly
Disclosed within 20 days of the date of the decision. However,

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 101

 this mandatory Public Reporting requirement will not apply
where the Player or other Person who has been found to have
committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation or to have violated the
prohibition against participation during Ineligibility or
Provisional Suspension is a Minor, a Protected Person, or a
Recreational Athlete. Any optional Public Reporting in a case
involving a Minor, a Protected Person, or a Recreational
Athlete must be proportionate to the facts and circumstances
of the case.

13.11.2 A decision on appeal that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation has

not been committed or that the prohibition against participation
during Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension has not been
violated may not be Publicly Disclosed unless the Player or
other Person who is the subject of the decision consents to
such disclosure. Where they do not so consent, the fact of the
appeal and/or a summary of the decision may be Publicly
Disclosed, provided that what is disclosed does not identify the
Player or other Person.

14. Confidentiality and reporting

14.1 Notice of Anti-Doping Rule Violations

14.1.1 Notice to Players or other Persons of Anti-Doping Rule

Violations asserted against them will occur as provided under
Articles 7 and 14.

14.1.2 If at any point during Results Management up until the issue of

a Charge Letter, the ITIA decides not to move forward with a
matter, it must notify the Player or other Person (if the Player
or other Person had already been informed of the ongoing
Results Management).

14.1.3 Subject strictly to Article 14.4, (a) the ITIA will send copies of
any notices sent to a Player as part of the management of an
apparent Whereabouts Failure to the ATP or WTA (as
applicable); and (b) the ITIA will send a copy of any Notice and
Charge Letter to each Interested Party, and will thereafter keep
each of them informed in relation to the status of the case under
Article 8. WADA and the NADO of the Player or other Person
(and, as applicable, the ATP or WTA and/or Grand Slam
Board) will keep the contents of the Charge Letter, and any
further information supplied to them pursuant to this Article
14.1.3, as well as any information they obtain by attending a

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 102

 hearing in accordance with Article 8.4.6, strictly confidential
unless and until a decision that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation
has been committed is published pursuant to Article 8.6;
provided that, if the decision exonerates the Player or other
Person, that confidentiality will be strictly maintained unless
and until the decision is overturned on appeal.

14.2 Content of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation Notice

14.2.1 Notice of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation under Article 2.1 will

include: the Player's or other Person's name, country, sport and
discipline within the sport, the Player's competitive level,
whether the test was In-Competition or Out-of-Competition, the
date of Sample collection, the analytical result reported by the
laboratory, and other information as required by the ISTI and
ISRM.

14.2.2 Notice of Anti-Doping Rule Violations other than under Article

2.1 will include the Player's or other Person's name, country,
sport and discipline within the sport, the Player’s competitive
level, the rule violated, and the basis of the asserted violation.

14.3 Status reports

Except with respect to investigations that have not resulted in a Notice

of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation, the Player's or other Person's NADO
and WADA will be regularly updated on the status and findings of any
review or proceedings conducted by the ITIA pursuant to Article 7,
Article 8 or Article 13 and will be provided with a prompt written
reasoned explanation or decision explaining the resolution of the matter.

14.4 Confidentiality

14.4.1 The ITIA will use its reasonable endeavours to ensure that
Persons under its control do not publicly identify Players or
other Persons whose Samples have resulted in Adverse
Analytical Findings or Atypical Findings, or Atypical Passport
Findings or Adverse Passport Findings, or are alleged to have
committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation under this
Programme, unless and until a Provisional Suspension has
been imposed or accepted, or a charge has been Publicly
Disclosed further to Article 7.13.4, or an Independent Tribunal
has determined that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation has been

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 103

 committed, and/or the Anti-Doping Rule Violation has been
admitted.

14.4.2 The ITIA will ensure that its employees (whether permanent or
otherwise), contractors, agents, consultants, and Delegated
Third Parties are subject to a fully enforceable contractual duty
of confidentiality and to fully enforceable procedures for the
investigation and disciplining of improper and/or unauthorised
disclosure of such confidential information.

14.4.3 The ITIA in its discretion may at any time disclose to other
organisations such information as the ITIA may consider
necessary or appropriate to facilitate administration or
enforcement of this Programme (including, without limitation,
National Associations selecting teams for the Davis Cup or the
Billie Jean King Cup), provided that each organisation provides
assurance satisfactory to the ITIA that the organisation will
maintain all such information in confidence. The ITIA will not
comment publicly on the specific facts of a pending case (as
opposed to general description of process and science) except
in response to public comments attributed to the Player or other
Person or their representatives.

14.5 Statistical reporting

The ITIA will publish at least annually a general statistical report of its
Doping Control activities, and provide a copy to WADA. The ITIA may
also publish reports showing the name of each Player tested, frequency
with which they have been tested, the date of each Testing, the
numbers of tests conducted on Players within certain ranking groups or
categories; and the identity of Events where Testing has been carried
out.

14.6 Doping Control information database and monitoring of

compliance

14.6.1 To enable WADA to perform its compliance monitoring role and

to ensure the effective use of resources and sharing of
applicable Doping Control information among Anti-Doping
Organisations, the ITIA will report to WADA, through ADAMS,
Doping Control-related information as required under the
applicable International Standard(s), including, in particular:

14.6.1.1 Athlete Biological Passport data for Players;

14.6.1.2 whereabouts information for Players;

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 104

 14.6.1.3 TUE decisions; and

14.6.1.4 Results Management decisions.

14.6.2 To facilitate coordinated test distribution planning, to avoid

unnecessary duplication in Testing by different Anti-Doping
Organisations, and to ensure that Athlete Biological Passport
profiles are updated, the ITIA will report all In-Competition and
Out-of-Competition tests to WADA by entering the Doping
Control forms into ADAMS in accordance with the
requirements and timelines contained in the ISTI.

14.6.3 To facilitate WADA’s oversight and appeal rights for TUEs, the
ITIA will report all TUE applications, decisions, and supporting
documentation using ADAMS in accordance with the
requirements and timelines contained in the ISTUE.

14.6.4 To facilitate WADA’s oversight and appeal rights for Results

Management, the ITIA will report the following information into
ADAMS in accordance with the requirements and timelines
outlined in the ISRM: (a) notifications of Anti-Doping Rule
Violations and related decisions for Adverse Analytical
Findings; (b) notifications and related decisions for other Anti-
Doping Rule Violations that are not Adverse Analytical
Findings; (c) Whereabouts Failures; and (d) any decision
imposing, lifting, or reinstating a Provisional Suspension.

14.6.5 The information described in this Article will be made

accessible, where appropriate and in accordance with the
applicable rules, to the Player, the Player’s NADO, and any
other Anti-Doping Organisations with Testing authority over the
Player.

14.7 Data privacy

14.7.1 The ITF/ITIA may collect, store, process, and/or disclose

personal information relating to Players and other Persons
where necessary and appropriate to conduct its Anti-Doping
Activities under the Code, the International Standards
(including specifically the ISPPPI), and/or this Programme, and
in compliance with applicable law.

14.7.2 Without limiting the foregoing, the ITIA will:

14.7.2.1 only process personal information in accordance with

a valid legal ground;

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 105

 14.7.2.2 notify any Player or other Person subject to this
Programme, in a manner and form that complies with
applicable laws and the ISPPPI, that their personal
information may be processed by the ITF/ITIA and
other Persons for the purpose of the implementation
of this Programme; and

14.7.2.3 ensure that any third party agents (including any

Delegated Third Party) with whom the ITIA shares
the personal information of any Player or other
Person is subject to appropriate technical and
contractual controls to protect the confidentiality and
privacy of such information.

15. Implementation of decisions

15.1 Automatic binding effect of decisions by Signatory Anti-Doping

Organisations

15.1.1 A decision in relation to an Anti-Doping Rule Violation or in

relation to a violation of the prohibition against participation
during Ineligibility that is made by an Anti-Doping Organisation,
or by a hearing panel or appeal panel or CAS will, after the
parties to the proceeding have been notified, be binding
automatically beyond the parties to the proceeding on the ITF,
the ITIA, National Associations, the ATP, the WTA, and the
Grand Slam Board as well as every Signatory in every sport
with the effects described below:

15.1.1.1 A decision by any of the above-described bodies

imposing a Provisional Suspension (after a
Provisional Hearing has occurred or the Player or
other Person has either accepted the Provisional
Suspension or has waived the right to a Provisional
Hearing, expedited hearing or expedited appeal
offered in accordance with Article 7.12.7)
automatically prohibits the Player or other Person
from participation (as described in Article 10.14.1) in
all sports within the authority of any Signatory during
the Provisional Suspension.

15.1.1.2 A decision by any of the above-described bodies

imposing a period of Ineligibility (after a hearing has
occurred or been waived) automatically prohibits the
Player or other Person from participation (as

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 106

 described in Article 10.14.1) in all sports within the
authority of any Signatory during the period of
Ineligibility.

15.1.1.3 A decision by any of the above-described bodies

accepting an Anti-Doping Rule Violation
automatically binds all Signatories.

15.1.1.4 A decision by any of the above-described bodies to

Disqualify results under Article 10.10 for a specified
period automatically Disqualifies all results obtained
within the authority of any Signatory during the
specified period.

15.1.2 Each of the ITF, the ITIA, National Associations, the ATP, the
WTA, and the Grand Slam Board will recognise and implement
a decision and its effects as required by Article 15.1.1 on the
date that it receives actual notice of the decision.
[Comment to Article 15.1.2: This may include notifying the decision
to Persons with a need to know, in accordance with Article 14.1.5 of
the World Anti-Doping Code.]

15.1.3 A decision by an Anti-Doping Organisation, an appeal panel or

CAS to suspend or lift Consequences will be binding on each
of the ITF, the ITIA, National Associations, the ATP, the WTA,
and the Grand Slam Board on the date that that entity receives
actual notice of the decision.

15.1.4 Notwithstanding any provision in Article 15.1.1, however, a

decision in relation to an Anti-Doping Rule Violation by a Major
Event Organisation made in an expedited process during an
Event will not be binding on the ITF, the ITIA, National
Associations, the ATP, the WTA, and the Grand Slam Board
unless the rules of the Major Event Organisation provide the
Player or other Person with an opportunity to appeal under non-
expedited procedures.

15.2 Implementation of other decisions by Anti-Doping Organisations

The ITIA (on behalf of the ITF) may implement decisions rendered by
Anti-Doping Organisations that are not listed in Article 15.1, such as a
Provisional Suspension prior to a Provisional Hearing or acceptance by
the Player or other Person. Any decisions so implemented by the ITIA
will bind the ITF, National Associations, the ATP, the WTA, and the
Grand Slam Board.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 107

15.3 Implementation of decisions by a body that is not a Signatory

A decision by a body that is not a Signatory must be implemented by

the ITF, the ITIA, National Associations, the ATP, the WTA, and the
Grand Slam Board if the ITIA determines that the decision appears to
be within the authority of that body and the anti-doping rules of that body
are otherwise consistent with the Code.

16. Statute of limitations

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Programme, no charge may

be brought against a Player or other Person in respect of an Anti-Doping
Rule Violation unless they have been given the Notice of the Anti-
Doping Rule Violation referenced in Article 7.10, or notification has been
reasonably attempted, within ten years of the date that the Anti-Doping
Rule Violation is asserted to have occurred.

17. Compliance reports

The ITIA will report to WADA on the ITF's compliance with the Code in
accordance with Code Article 24 and the International Standard for
Code Compliance by Signatories.

18. Education

The ITIA will plan, implement, evaluate, and promote Education in line
with the requirements of Code Article 18.2 and the International
Standard for Education.

19. Interpretation of the Code

19.1 The official text of the Code will be maintained by WADA and published
in English and French. In the event of any conflict between the English
and French versions, the English version will prevail.

19.2 The comments annotating various provisions of the Code will be used
to interpret the Code.

19.3 The Code must be interpreted as an independent and autonomous text

and not by reference to the existing law or statutes of the Signatories or
governments.

19.4 The headings used for the various Parts and Articles of the Code are
for convenience only and will not be deemed part of the substance of

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 108

 the Code or to affect in any way the language of the provisions to which
they refer.

19.5 Where the term 'days' is used in the Code or an International Standard,
it means calendar days unless otherwise specified.

19.6 The Purpose, Scope, and Organisation of the World Anti-Doping

Program and the Code and Appendix 1, Definitions, are integral parts
of the Code.

TADP 2024 v.1 01.01.2024 109

 APPENDIX ONE

DEFINITIONS

ABP Documentation Package. The material produced by the APMU to support

an Adverse Passport Finding, such as, but not limited to, analytical data,
Expert Panel comments, evidence of confounding factors, as well as other
relevant supporting information.

ABP Programme. The programme and methods of gathering and collating

biological Markers on a longitudinal basis to facilitate indirect detection of the
Use of Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods.

ABP Testing. The collection, transportation, and analysis of Samples as part

of the ABP Programme.

ADAMS. The Anti-Doping Administration and Management System is a web-

based database management tool for data entry, storage, sharing, and
reporting designed to assist stakeholders and WADA in their anti-doping
operations in conjunction with data protection legislation.

Administration. Providing, supplying, supervising, facilitating, or otherwise

participating in the Use or Attempted Use by another Person of a Prohibited
Substance or Prohibited Method. However, this definition does not include the
actions of bona fide medical personnel involving a Prohibited Substance or
Prohibited Method Used for genuine and legal therapeutic purposes or other
acceptable justification, and does not include actions involving Prohibited
Substances that are not prohibited in Out-of-Competition Testing unless the
circumstances as a whole demonstrate that such Prohibited Substances are
not intended for genuine and legal therapeutic purposes or are intended to
enhance sport performance.

Adverse Analytical Finding. A report from a WADA-accredited laboratory or

other WADA-approved laboratory that, consistent with the ISL, establishes in
a Sample the presence of a Prohibited Substance or any of its Metabolites or
Markers or evidence of the Use of a Prohibited Method.

Adverse Passport Finding. A report identified as an Adverse Passport Finding

as described in the applicable International Standards.

Aggravating Circumstances. Circumstances involving, or actions by, a Player

or other Person that may justify the imposition of a period of Ineligibility greater
than the standard sanction. Such circumstances and actions include, but are
not limited to: the Player or other Person Used or Possessed multiple
Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods, Used or Possessed a
Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method on multiple occasions, or
committed multiple other Anti-Doping Rule Violations; a normal individual
would be likely to enjoy the performance-enhancing effects of the Anti-Doping
Rule Violation(s) beyond the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility; the
Player or other Person engaged in deceptive or obstructive conduct to avoid
the detection or adjudication of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation; or the Player or
other Person engaged in Tampering during Results Management. For the
avoidance of doubt, these examples are not exhaustive, and other similar
circumstances or conduct may also justify the imposition of a longer period of
Ineligibility.

Anti-Doping Activities. Anti-doping Education and information, test distribution

planning, maintenance of a Registered Testing Pool, managing Athlete
Biological Passports, conducting Testing, organising analysis of Samples,
gathering of intelligence and conduct of investigations, processing of TUE
applications, Results Management, monitoring and enforcing compliance with
any Consequences imposed, and all other activities related to anti-doping to
be carried out by or on behalf of an Anti-Doping Organisation, as set out in the
Code and/or the International Standards.

Anti-Doping Organisation. WADA or a Signatory that is responsible for

adopting rules for initiating, implementing or enforcing any part of the Doping
Control process. This includes, for example, the International Olympic
Committee, the International Paralympic Committee, other Major Event
Organisations that conduct Testing at their Events, International Federations,
and NADOs.
[Comment to Anti-Doping Organisation: Depending on the context, a reference in
the Programme to an Anti-Doping Organisation may also include a Delegated Third
Party acting on behalf of that Anti-Doping Organisation.]
Anti-Doping Rule Violation. As defined in Article 2.

Athlete Biological Passport (or ABP). The programme and methods of

gathering and collating data as described in the ISTI and the ISL.

Athlete Passport Management Unit (or APMU). As defined in Article 5.5.2.

Attempt. Purposely engaging in conduct that constitutes a substantial step in

a course of conduct planned to culminate in the commission of an Anti-Doping
Rule Violation; provided, however, that there will be no Anti-Doping Rule
Violation based solely on an Attempt to commit an Anti-Doping Rule Violation
if the Player or other Person renounces the Attempt prior to it being discovered
by a third party not involved in the Attempt.
Atypical Finding. A report from a WADA-accredited laboratory or other WADA-
approved laboratory that requires further investigation as provided in the ISL
or related Technical Documents prior to the determination of an Adverse
Analytical Finding.

Atypical Passport Finding. A report described as an Atypical Passport Finding

as described in the applicable International Standards.

CAS. The Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne, Switzerland.

Charge Letter. The letter described in Article 7.13.

Code. The World Anti-Doping Code.

Competition. A single race, match, game or other sport contest. In tennis

specifically, any stand-alone competition held as part of an Event, such as a
singles competition or a doubles or mixed doubles competition.

Consequences. A Player's or other Person's Anti-Doping Rule Violation may

result in one or more of the following:

(a) Disqualification means the Player’s results in a particular

Competition or Event are invalidated, with all resulting consequences,
including forfeiture of any medals, titles, ranking points, and Prize
Money;

(b) Ineligibility means the Player or other Person is barred on account

of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation for a specified period of time from
participating in any Competition, Event or other activity or funding, in
accordance with Article 10.14;

(c) Provisional Suspension means the Player or other Person is

barred temporarily from participating in any Competition, Event or other
activity in accordance with Article 10.14;

(d) Financial Consequences means a financial sanction imposed

in accordance with Article 10.12; and

(e) Public Disclosure (or to Publicly Disclose) means the

dissemination or distribution of information to the general public or
Persons beyond those Persons entitled to earlier notification under the
provisions of this Programme.

Contaminated Product. A product that contains a Prohibited Substance that is

not disclosed on the product label or in information available in a reasonable
internet search.
Covered Event(s). The Grand Slam tournaments, Davis Cup, Billie Jean King
Cup, Hopman Cup, the Olympic Tennis event, the Paralympic Tennis event,
other IOC-recognised International Events, WTA tournaments and WTA
Finals and ATP Tour tournaments and ATP Finals, ATP Cup, Next Gen ATP
Finals, ATP Challenger Tour tournaments, United Cup, ITF World Tennis
Tour events, ITF World Tennis Tour Juniors events, ITF World Tennis
Masters Tour events, ITF Wheelchair events, and ITF Beach Tennis Tour
events.

Decision Limit. The value of the result for a threshold substance in a Sample
above which an Adverse Analytical Finding will be reported, as defined in the
ISL.

Delegated Third Party. Any Person to which the ITF, the ITIA on behalf of the
ITF, or any other Anti-Doping Organisation delegates any aspect of Doping
Control or anti-doping Education programmes including, but not limited to,
Doping Control personnel, as well as third parties or other Anti-Doping
Organisations that conduct Sample collection or other Doping Control services
or anti-doping Educational programs on behalf of the ITF, the ITIA, or other
Anti-Doping Organisation. This definition does not include the CAS.

Demand. As defined in Article 5.7.3.1.

Disqualification. See definition of Consequences.

Doping Control. All steps and processes from test distribution planning
through to ultimate disposition of any appeal and the enforcement of
Consequences, including all steps and processes in between, including (but
not limited to) Testing, investigations, whereabouts, TUEs, Sample collection
and handling, laboratory analysis, Results Management, and investigations or
proceedings relating to violations of Article 10.14 (status during Ineligibility or
Provisional Suspension).

Education. The process of learning to instil values and develop behaviours

that foster and protect the spirit of sport, and to prevent intentional and
unintentional doping.

Effective Date. As defined in Article 1.5.

Event. A series of individual Competitions conducted together under one

organising, ruling body.

Event Period. The period deemed to start at the same time as the In-
Competition Period and to end at midnight on the day of the last match played
in the Event.
Event Venue. The area that is the greater of (a) the city in which the Event
takes place; and (b) the area within a twenty-mile radius of the venue of the
Event.

Expert Panel. Suitably-qualified experts chosen by the ITIA and/or APMU to

evaluate Athlete Biological Passports in accordance with the ISRM.

Fault. Fault is any breach of duty or any lack of care appropriate to a particular
situation. Factors to be taken into consideration in assessing a Player's or
other Person's degree of Fault include, for example, the Player's or other
Person's experience, whether the Player or other Person is a Protected
Person, special considerations such as impairment, the degree of risk that
should have been perceived by the Player and the level of care and
investigation exercised by the Player in relation to what should have been the
perceived level of risk. In assessing the Player's or other Person's degree of
Fault, the circumstances considered must be specific and relevant to explain
the Player's or other Person's departure from the expected standard of
behaviour. Thus, for example, the fact that a Player would lose the opportunity
to earn large sums of money during a period of Ineligibility, or the fact that the
Player only has a short time left in their career, or the timing of the sporting
calendar, would not be relevant factors to be considered in reducing the period
of Ineligibility under Article 10.6.1 or 10.6.2.

Filing Failure. As defined in the ISRM.

In-Competition. The period(s) so described in Article 5.3.3.

In-Competition Dates. As defined in Article 5.4.2.3.

In-Competition Period. As defined in Article 5.3.3.

Independent Observer Programme. A team of observers and/or auditors,

under the supervision of WADA, who observe and provide guidance on the
Doping Control process at certain Events and report on their observations as
part of WADA's compliance monitoring program.

Independent Panel. A panel of lawyers, medical, and/or technical experts,

and/or other suitably qualified persons with experience in anti-doping, from
whom a person designated as Chair of the Independent Panel will select one
or more persons (which may include themselves) to sit as an Independent
Tribunal to hear and determine particular matters arising under the
Programme, in accordance with Article 8.1. Each person on the Independent
Panel must be independent of the parties to the matter (the ITIA may provide
reasonable compensation and reimbursement of expenses to such persons
for the time they spend and the expenses they incur in sitting as a member of
an Independent Tribunal under the Programme).
Independent Tribunal. An independent and impartial tribunal of three persons
(subject to Article 8.3.2.1) appointed by the Chair of the Independent Panel to
hear and determine matters arising under the Programme.

Ineligibility. See definition of Consequences.

Institutional Independence. Hearing panels on appeal must be fully

independent institutionally from the Anti-Doping Organisation responsible for
Results Management, meaning that they must not in any way be administered
by, connected or subject to that Anti-Doping Organisation.

Interested Party. The ITF, the Player or other Person's NADO, WADA, the
ATP or WTA (if the Player has an ATP or WTA ranking), the Grand Slam Board
(where the Anti-Doping Rule Violation in issue is based on an Adverse
Analytical Finding from a sample collected at a Grand Slam event), and any
other Anti-Doping Organisation that has a right to appeal the decision in
question under Article 13.2.

International Event. An Event or Competition where the International Olympic

Committee, the International Paralympic Committee, an international
federation, a Major Event Organisation or another international sport
organisation is the ruling body for the Event or appoints the technical officials
for the Event. In respect of the ITF, an Event is an International Event if it is a
Covered Event.

International-Level Player. Any Player who enters or participates in more than

one Covered Event (whether in qualifying or in main draw).

International Registered Testing Pool. As defined in Article 5.4.2.1.

International Standard. A standard adopted by WADA in support of the Code.

International Standards include any Technical Documents issued pursuant to
the International Standard.

International Standard for Education. The International Standard of the same

name adopted by WADA in support of the Code, which is available on WADA’s
website (wada-ama.org).

International Standard for Laboratories (ISL). The International Standard of

the same name adopted by WADA in support of the Code, which is available
on WADA’s website (wada-ama.org).

International Standard for the Protection of Privacy and Personal Information

(ISPPPI). The International Standard of the same name adopted by WADA in
support of the Code, which is available on WADA’s website (wada-ama.org).
International Standard for Results Management (ISRM). The International
Standard of the same name adopted by WADA in support of the Code, which
is available on WADA’s website (wada-ama.org) and in the Appendices to this
Programme.

International Standard for Testing and Investigations (ISTI). The International

Standard of the same name adopted by WADA in support of the Code, which
is available on WADA’s website (wada-ama.org) and in the Appendices to this
Programme.

International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions (ISTUE). The

International Standard of the same name adopted by WADA in support of the
Code, which is available on WADA’s website (wada-ama.org) and in the
Appendices to this Programme.

ITF. References to the ITF shall mean ITF Limited (t/a the International Tennis
Federation) and/or ITF Licensing (UK) Limited and/or their designees.

ITIA. The International Tennis Integrity Agency and/or its designees.

ITIA Senior Director, Anti-Doping. An appointee of the ITIA with supervisory

responsibilities in relation to the Programme.

Major Event Organisation. The continental associations of National Olympic

Committees and other international multi-sport organisations that function as
the ruling body for any continental, regional or other International Event.

Marker. A compound, group of compounds or biological variable(s) that

indicates the Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.

Metabolite. Any substance produced by a biotransformation process.

Minor. A natural Person under the age of 18.

Missed Test. As defined in the ISRM.

National Anti-Doping Organization (or NADO). The entity designated by each

country as possessing the primary authority and responsibility to adopt and
implement anti-doping rules, direct the collection of Samples, manage test
results, and conduct Results Management at the national level. If this
designation has not been made by the competent public authority(ies), the
entity will be the country’s National Olympic Committee or its designee.

National Association. A national or regional entity that is a member of the ITF

or is recognised by the ITF as the entity governing the sport of tennis in that
nation or region.
National-Level Player. Players who compete in sport at the national level, as
defined by each NADO, consistent with the ISTI.

National Olympic Committee. The organisation recognised by the

International Olympic Committee. The term 'National Olympic Committee' will
also include the National Sport Confederation in those countries where the
National Sport Confederation assumes typical National Olympic Committee
responsibilities in the anti-doping area.

National Registered Testing Pool. A pool of athletes established by a NADO

in exercise of its powers under the ISTI, triggering whereabouts obligations on
the part of those athletes.

No Fault or Negligence. The Player or other Person establishing that they did
not know or suspect, and could not reasonably have known or suspected even
with the exercise of utmost caution, that they had Used or been administered
the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method or otherwise violated an anti-
doping rule. Except in the case of a Protected Person or Recreational Athlete,
for any violation of Article 2.1 the Player must also establish how the
Prohibited Substance entered their system.

No Significant Fault or Negligence. The Player or other Person establishing

that their Fault or Negligence, when viewed in the totality of the circumstances
and taking into account the criteria for No Fault or Negligence, was not
significant in relation to the Anti-Doping Rule Violation. Except in the case of
a Protected Person or Recreational Athlete, for any violation of Article 2.1 the
Player must also establish how the Prohibited Substance entered their system.

Notice. See definition in Article 7.10.

Operational Independence. This means that (1) board members, staff

members, commission members, consultants and officials of the Anti-Doping
Organisation with responsibility for Results Management or its affiliates (e.g.,
member federation or confederation), as well as any Person involved in the
investigation and pre-adjudication of the matter may not be appointed as
members and/or clerks (to the extent that such clerk is involved in the
deliberation process and/or drafting of any decision) of hearing panels; and
(2) hearing panels will be in a position to conduct the hearing and decision-
making process without interference from the Anti-Doping Organisation or any
third party. The objective is to ensure that members of the hearing panel or
individuals otherwise involved in the decision of the hearing panel, are not
involved in the investigation of, or decisions to proceed with, the case.

Out-of-Competition. The period(s) described in Article 5.4.1.

Person. A natural person or an organisation or other entity.

Player. Any player subject to the Programme as set out in Article 1.2.6.

Player's Nominated Address. As defined in Article 1.3.1.11.

Player Support Person. Any coach, trainer, manager, agent, team staff,
official, nutritionist, medical or paramedical personnel, parent or any other
Person working with, treating or assisting a Player who is participating in or
preparing for sports Competition.

Possession. The actual, physical possession, or constructive possession

(which will be found only if the Person has exclusive control or intends to
exercise control over the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method or the
premises in which a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method exists);
provided, however, that if the Person does not have exclusive control or
intends to exercise control over the Prohibited Substance/Method or the
premises in which a Prohibited Substance/Method exists, constructive
possession will only be found if the Person knew about the presence of the
Prohibited Substance/Method and intended to exercise control over it.
Provided, however, that there will be no Anti-Doping Rule Violation based
solely on Possession if, prior to receiving notification of any kind that the
Person has committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation, the Person has taken
concrete action demonstrating that the Person never intended to have
Possession and has renounced Possession by explicitly declaring it to an Anti-
Doping Organisation. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this
definition, the purchase (including by any electronic or other means) of a
Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method constitutes Possession by the
Person who makes the purchase.

Prize Money. All of the consideration provided by the organiser of a

Competition as a reward for performance in the Competition, whether
monetary (i.e. cash) or non-monetary (e.g. a trophy, vehicle or other prize).
Where the reward is attributable to performance as part of a team, the rules
of the Competition may provide for how much of the reward is to be allocated
to a Player for purposes of forfeiture under the Programme. Such rules will be
without prejudice to the provisions of Article 9 with respect to doubles Prize
Money. Any Prize Money forfeited must be repaid without deducting tax paid
by or on behalf of the Player, unless the Player shows by means of
independent and verifiable evidence that such tax has been paid and is not
recoverable by the Player.

Programme. As defined in Article 1.1.1.

Prohibited List. The list issued by WADA identifying the Prohibited Substances
and Prohibited Methods.
Prohibited Method. Any method so described on the Prohibited List.

Prohibited Substance. Any substance, or class of substances, so described

on the Prohibited List.

Protected Person. A Player or other natural Person who at the time of the Anti-
Doping Rule Violation: (i) has not reached the age of 16; or (ii) has not reached
the age of 18 and is not included in any Registered Testing Pool and has never
competed in any International Event in an open category; or (iii) for reasons
other than age has been determined to lack legal capacity under applicable
national law.

Provisional Hearing. An expedited abbreviated hearing, occurring prior to a

full merits hearing under Article 8, that provides the Player with notice and an
opportunity to be heard in either written or oral form.

Provisional Suspension. See definition of Consequences.

Public Disclosure (or to Publicly Disclose). See definition of Consequences.

Recreational Athlete. A natural Person who is so defined by the relevant

NADO; provided, however, the term does not include any Person who, within
the five years prior to committing any Anti-Doping Rule Violation, has been an
International-Level Player (as defined by each International Federation
consistent with the ISTI) or National-Level Player (as defined by each NADO
consistent with the ISTI), has represented any country in an International
Event in an open category or has been included within any Registered Testing
Pool or other whereabouts information pool maintained by any International
Federation or NADO.

Registered Testing Pool. The pool of highest-priority athletes established

separately at the international level by International Federations and at the
national level by NADOs, who are subject to focused In-Competition and Out-
of-Competition Testing as part of that International Federation's or NADO's
test distribution plan and therefore are required to provide whereabouts
information.

Results Management. The process encompassing the timeframe between

notification as per ISRM Article 5, or in certain cases (e.g., Atypical Finding,
Adverse Passport Findings, Whereabouts Failures), such pre-notification
steps expressly provided for in ISRM Article 5, through the sending of the
Charge Letter and until the final resolution of the matter, including the end of
the hearing process at first instance and on appeal (if an appeal was lodged).

Review Board. A standing panel appointed by the ITIA, consisting of persons

with medical, technical, and/or legal experience in anti-doping, to perform the
functions assigned to the Review Board in the Programme. Further persons
may be co-opted onto the Review Board on a case-by-case basis, where there
is a need for their specific expertise and/or experience.

Sample or Specimen. Any biological material collected for the purposes of

Doping Control. The terms 'A Sample' and 'B Sample' will have the meanings
ascribed to them in the ISTI. Biological material collected for other purposes
(e.g. DNA collected as part of an investigation for identification purposes) will
not be considered a 'Sample' (and so will not be subject to Article 6 for
purposes of this Programme).

Signatories. Those entities signing the Code and agreeing to implement the
Code and the International Standards, as provided in Code Article 23.

Specified Methods. As defined in Article 4.2.2.

Specified Substances. As defined in Article 4.2.2.

Substantial Assistance. For purposes of Article 10.7.1, a Person providing

Substantial Assistance must: (1) fully disclose in a signed written statement or
recorded interview all information that they possess in relation to Anti-Doping
Rule Violations or other proceeding described in Article 10.7.1.1, and (2) fully
cooperate with the investigation and adjudication of any case or matter related
to that information, including (for example) by presenting testimony at a
hearing if requested to do so by the ITIA or other Anti-Doping Organisation or
the hearing panel. Further, the information provided must be credible and must
comprise an important part of any case or proceeding that is initiated or, if no
case or proceeding is initiated, must have provided a sufficient basis on which
a case or proceeding could have been brought.

Tampering. Intentional conduct that subverts the Doping Control process but
that would not otherwise be included in the definition of Prohibited Methods.
Tampering includes, without limitation, offering or accepting a bribe to perform
or fail to perform an act, preventing the collection of a Sample, affecting or
making impossible the analysis of a Sample, falsifying documents submitted
to an Anti-Doping Organisation or TUE committee or hearing panel, procuring
false testimony from witnesses, committing any other fraudulent act upon the
Anti-Doping Organisation or hearing body to affect Results Management or
the imposition of Consequences, and any other similar intentional interference
or Attempted interference with any aspect of Doping Control.

Target Testing. Selection of specific Players for Testing based on criteria set
out in the ISTI.

Technical Document. A document adopted and published by WADA from time

to time containing mandatory technical requirements on specific anti-doping
topics as set out in an International Standard.
Tennis Anti-Doping Programme Portal. The online portal available at
tennis.idtm.se/.

Testing. The parts of the Doping Control process involving test distribution
planning, Sample collection, Sample handling, and Sample transport to the
laboratory.

Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE). A Therapeutic Use Exemption allows a

Player with a medical condition to Use a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited
Method, but only if the conditions set out in the ISTUE are met.

Trafficking. Selling, giving, transporting, sending, delivering or distributing (or

Possessing for any such purpose) a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited
Method (either physically or by any electronic or other means) by a Player,
Player Support Person or any other Person subject to the authority of an Anti-
Doping Organisation to any third party; provided, however, that this definition
does not include (a) the actions of bona fide medical personnel involving a
Prohibited Substance Used for genuine and legal therapeutic purposes or
other acceptable justification; or (b) actions involving Prohibited Substances
that are not prohibited in Out-of-Competition Testing unless the circumstances
as a whole demonstrate that such Prohibited Substances were not intended
for genuine and legal therapeutic purposes or are intended to enhance sport
performance.

TUE Committee. A panel appointed by the ITIA and composed of at least three
physicians with experience in the care and treatment of Players and a sound
knowledge of clinical and exercise medicine. In all cases involving a Player
with a disability, one of the physicians must have experience with the care and
treatment of Players with disabilities. The ITIA may also delegate the
appointment of the panel to the International Testing Agency (ITA) or other
suitably qualified body.

Use. The utilisation, application, ingestion, injection or consumption by any

means whatsoever of any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.

WADA. The World Anti-Doping Agency.

Whereabouts Failure. A Filing Failure or a Missed Test, as those terms are

defined in the ISRM.

Without Prejudice Agreement. For purposes of Articles 10.7.1.2 and 10.8.2.2,

a written agreement between the ITIA (or other an Anti-Doping Organisation)
and a Player or other Person that allows the Player or other Person to provide
information to the ITIA (or other Anti-Doping Organisation) in a defined time-
limited setting with the understanding that if an agreement for Substantial
Assistance or a case resolution agreement is not finalised, the information
provided by the Player or other Person in this particular setting may not be
used by the ITIA (or other Anti-Doping Organisation) against the Player or
other Person in any Results Management proceeding under the Code, and
that the information provided by the ITIA (or other Anti-Doping Organisation)
may not be used by the Player or other Person against the ITIA (or other Anti-
Doping Organisation) in any Results Management proceeding under the
Code. Such an agreement will not preclude the ITIA (or other Anti-Doping
Organisation), Player or other Person from using any information or evidence
gathered from any source other than during the specific time-limited setting
described in the agreement.
 APPENDIX TWO

TENNIS TESTING PROTOCOLS

The following protocols are designed to supplement the International Standard

for Testing and Investigations (ISTI) as necessary to reflect the specificities of
tennis. They are not intended to amend or contradict the International
Standard for Testing and Investigations. In the event of any conflict between
these protocols and the International Standard for Testing and Investigations,
the latter will prevail.

1. Collection of urine Samples

1.1 If a Sample collected from a Player does not have a Suitable

Specific Gravity for Analysis (as defined in the International
Standard for Testing and Investigations), the Doping Control
Officer (DCO) will inform the Player that they are required to
provide a further Sample or Samples, until a Sample that has a
Suitable Specific Gravity for Analysis is provided. (See ISTI
Annex F). To facilitate this, the Player should fully void their
bladder when providing a Sample, and any further Sample
should not be collected for at least one hour after the previous
Sample was collected. In the meantime, the Player should not
hydrate (i.e., intake liquid) (unless necessary to avoid or treat
dehydration) as this may delay production of a suitable Sample.

2. Collection of blood Samples

2.1 Prior to providing a blood Sample (see ISTI Annex D), the Player
must sit down in a normal seated position (not lie down), with
their feet on the floor, for at least ten minutes.

2.2 A blood Sample collected as part of Athlete Biological Passport

(ABP) Testing will not be collected within two hours of the Player
training or competing. If the Player has trained or competed
within two hours of the time that the Player is notified of their
selection for such Sample collection, the DCO or a Chaperone
will observe the Player continuously (and the Player must
cooperate to facilitate such continuous observation) until the two-
hour period has elapsed, and then the Sample will be collected.

A2.1
3. Collection of urine Samples and/or blood Samples

3.1 In addition to the Player, the persons authorised to be present

during the Sample collection session are:

a. The DCO and their assistant(s).

b. The persons identified at ISTI Article 6.3.3.

c. The ITIA Senior Director, Anti-Doping and/or their

designee(s).

3.2 No photography or audio or video recording of the Sample

collection session is permitted. Instead, the Doping Control Form
will be the definitive record of the Sample collection session, and
any comments regarding the Sample collection session must be
recorded on the Doping Control Form. A Player may not make
their participation in a Sample collection session conditional upon
being permitted to photograph or record the session. Where a
Player or other Person insists on photographing or recording the
session in violation of this provision, then (subject to the review
in accordance with Article 7.8) a case may be brought against
the Player or other Person under Article 7.15. Where the conduct
of the Player or other Person results in the Sample collection
session being discontinued, then (subject to the review in
accordance with Article 7.8) a case may be brought against the
Player and/or other Person (on its own or in the alternative) for
an Anti-Doping Rule Violation under Article 2.3 and/or Article 2.5.
For the avoidance of doubt, any conduct by a Player Support
Person or other member of the Player's entourage in relation to
a Sample collection session may in appropriate circumstances
be imputed to the Player for these purposes.

4. Storage of Samples and Sample collection documentation

4.1 Storage of Samples (ISTI Article 8.3.1):

a. The DCO is responsible for ensuring that all Samples are

stored in a manner that protects their identity, integrity and
security.

b. The DCO must keep the Samples secured and under their
control until the Samples are passed to a third party (e.g.,
the laboratory, or a courier to take them to the laboratory).
Samples collected at an Event must not be left

A2.2
 unattended, unless they are locked away in a refrigerator
or cupboard or in a secure area only accessible to
authorised personnel, for example. In the absence of a
secure area where the Samples may be left, the DCO must
keep the Samples under their control. Access to Samples
must be restricted at all times to authorised personnel.

c. Where possible, Samples will be stored in a cool

environment. Warm conditions should be avoided.

4.2 Secure handling of Sample collection documentation (ISTI

Article 8.3.2):

a. The DCO is responsible for ensuring that the Sample

collection documentation for each Sample is securely
handled after completion.

b. Those parts of the Sample collection documentation that

identify the Player or could be used to identify the Player
that provided a particular Sample must be kept separately
from the Samples themselves. Where a separate secure
storage site is available at the collection site (lockable
and/or accessible only by authorised personnel), the
documentation may be stored there. Otherwise, it will be
kept by the DCO and taken away from the site overnight.

A2.3
 APPENDIX THREE

THE 2024 PROHIBITED LIST

A3.1
 APPENDIX FOUR

INTERNATIONAL STANDARD
FOR THERAPEUTIC USE
EXEMPTIONS (ISTUE)

A4.1
 APPENDIX FIVE

INTERNATIONAL STANDARD
FOR TESTING AND
INVESTIGATIONS (ISTI)

A5.1
 APPENDIX SIX

INTERNATIONAL STANDARD
FOR RESULTS
MANAGEMENT (ISRM)

A6.1