体育仲裁中认定证据可采性的法律依据——以阿达穆诉国际足联纪律处罚案为例

CAS在阿达穆诉国际足联一案中揭示了认定证据可采性的主要法律依据与援引方式，仲裁庭对此具有较大裁量权。法律依据包括瑞士《联邦国际私法典》、《瑞士民法典》、《国际足联纪律准则》、《欧洲人权公约》、学者著述以及瑞士联邦最高法院、欧洲人权法院、CAS、国际仲裁与投资争议解决机构的判例，呈现出以瑞士法律规范为中心，综合适用其他相关规范的多元化特征；认定刑事法律规范及诉讼程序法律不适用于体育仲裁、体育组织规则中的证据规定将得到优先适用、仲裁庭可以采用非法证据，且证据可采性的判断结果须受到瑞士程序性公共政策的限制。然而，CAS仲裁庭援引法律和裁量说理并无标准，适用刑事法律存在疑惑，体育纪律处罚案件的性质、CAS处理纪律案件的矫正目的，要求其适用相对稳定的法律规范，降低裁量的灵活性，对此，CAS应制定相关的裁量标准及证据规则，并可通过建立指导性案件查询系统在一定程度上弥补仲裁法律规则的不足，从而规范仲裁庭裁量，确保体育争议的公正有效解决。

Rules of Law in Assessing Admissibility in Sports Arbitration from Perspective of Disciplinary Case of Adamu v. FIFA

The CAS Adamu v. FIFA has revealed the rules of law in assessing admissibility and the citing methods, and the panel has great discretion. The rules of law include Swiss Federal Private International Law, Swiss Civil Code, FIFA Disciplinary Code, ECHR, scholar works and cases of Swiss Federal Tribunal, the European Court of Human Rights, UNCITRAL, ICSID, and CAS. CAS panel tends to apply Swiss rules of law mostly and consider other proper rules as well. CAS holds that criminal law principles, standards and rules of criminal procedure are not applicable in sports arbitration. Evidence rules of sports federations will be applied primarily. Panels can use illegal evidence and the assessment of admissibility should comply with Swiss procedural public policy. However, there is no standard on reasoning of application of law and discretion, and the exclusion of criminal rules is in doubt. Moreover, the essence of sports disciplinary case and the correction purpose of CAS in settling disciplinary disputes demand the panel to apply rules of law in a stable way, and limit the discretion at the same time. Therefore, CAS should formulate certain standards of discretion and evidence rules, and construct guiding case system which can make up for the lacking of rules of law on arbitration to some extent, and finally form a criterion of discretion to ensure the sports disputes be solved both fair and effective.