[3][5][6] Starting in 2016, an anti-doping division of CAS judges, who specialize in doping cases at the Olympic Games, replaced the IOC disciplinary commission.

[9] As a Swiss arbitration organization, decisions of the CAS can be appealed to the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland.

It occurred in 2012 for the first time in more than 20 years when the Federal Supreme Court overturned the case of Matuzalém, a Brazilian football player accused of breach of contract.

[14] For example, the ECHR found CAS and the Federal Supreme Court discriminated against and violated the privacy of runner Caster Semenya.

The most significant change resulting from this reform was the creation of an "International Council of Arbitration for Sport" (ICAS) to look after the running and financing of the CAS, thereby taking the place of the IOC.

[21][22] It is noteworthy that CAS had already issued an award suspending an athlete based on the longitudinal profiling of the biological markers before the adoption of the ABP by the IFs [international federations]: in CAS 2009/A/1912 & 1913 [Pechstein], the Panel suspended an Olympic athlete after the biological data showed irregular blood values.

It finds, in balancing the interests of Miss Raducan with the commitment of the Olympic Movement to drug-free sport, the Anti-Doping Code must be enforced without compromise.

"[25]The ad hoc court for the 2016 Olympics had registered 18 cases by 3 August, surpassing the record two days before the Opening Ceremony.