<![CDATA[Anti-doping policy aims to protect the integrity of sport, but the strict liability principle under the World Anti-Doping Code may raise concerns about the legal protection of athletes. The research problem lies in the absence of a national framework that clearly distinguishes between establishing an anti-doping rule violation and determining the appropriate sanction, as well as the lack of protective infrastructure that enables Indonesian athletes to access the proportionality mechanisms provided by the Code. The study employs a juridical-empirical (socio-legal) method combining statutory, conceptual, comparative, and empirical approaches, based on interviews with stakeholders and participatory observation. The findings show that Indonesia’s normative framework is largely aligned with the Code. The main challenges lie in implementation, including funding dependence, limited testing capacity, low levels of athlete awareness, inadequate legal assistance, and a mismatch between BPOM product authorization and the Prohibited List. Strict liability remains justified at the stage of establishing a violation, whereas proportionality should operate at the fault-based stage of determining the sanction. The article recommends a two-stage framework for athlete protection, supported by an institutional layer comprising IADO–BPOM coordination, legal assistance, and greater IADO independence.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
