he right of football clubs to establish local bans (the so-called “blacklists”) depends on a number of reasons. A local ban on visiting football matches can act as a measure to combat the unlawful behaviour of viewers, thus complementing the administrative responsibility of the spectators. In Russian law it is not possible to impose a ban on the sale of tickets to football matches by football clubs. The current wording of the rules of spectators’ behaviour during official sporting events does not, by default, allow supporter identity checks when entering the stadium. That also complicates the identification of spectators for being on the “blacklist”. The practice of civil suits brought by football clubs against supporters, as one of the few legal tools to influence supporters, is currently not widespread. As a result, there are no uniform approaches to resolve these disputes: the courts motivate refusals by various arguments, the validity of which can be reasonably criticised.

No abstract

The authors refer to the exceptional circumstances surrounding Sun Yang’s violation. The athlete intervened in the doping control procedure in several ways. First, he questioned the proper accreditation of the IDTM’s (The company “International Doping Tests and Management”) Samples Collection Personnel, one of which photographed him. This officer was suspended from urine sampling, but there was no longer a male specialist on the IDTM’s Samples Collection Personnel. Therefore, the collection of urine samples did not take place due to the athlete’s actions. A general distrust of IDTM’s Samples Collection Personnel due to inappropriate photographing was the catalyst for follow-up action. Secondly, the athlete required IDTM’s Samples Collection Personnel to confirm his credentials (accreditation) from the anti-doping organization, despite the submission of documents by IDTM’s Samples Collection Personnel following the International Standard for Testing and Investigations. Not having received the additional and, in the opinion of the athlete, necessary documents, he refused to participate in the doping control procedure as a whole, tearing up his previously given written consent. Finally, the athlete took part in the destruction of blood samples with a hammer, but his role in this process was controversial. A prerequisite for the destruction process of the samples was the assistance of the IDTM’s Samples Collection Personnel, who handed them over to the athlete in response to insistent demands. The listed circumstances, which are exceptional, however, could not affect the reduction of Sun Yang’s period of ineligibility, since the FINA (International Swimming Federation) Doping Control Rules, based on WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) Code 2015, do not imply such a basis. The new WADA Code 2021 offers a more flexible concept of liability and takes into account exceptional circumstances that in subsequent disputes about tampering can be established based on the example of the dispute CAS 2019/A/6148.

Autonomy as a fundamental guarantee for the implementation of educational activities accompanied the formation of the first universities, subsequently acquiring regional specificity. The education system in Russia objectively operates by a different structure for the interrelation of the subjects and mechanisms in order for educational organizations to implement their activities compared to the era of the first universities. In the article, the authors identify and propose to consider the key nodes of the legal status of universities: organizational and legal form as a legal shell, proprietary rights in property, methods of financing, tax preferences, and forms of control over activities. The study of these features is important for answering the questions of whether they lead to the emergence of a new model of legal regulation of universities and whether there is a correlation with university autonomy. Both answers, as shown in the article, are negative. The decision should not come only “from above”, although the state recognition of the independence of universities should be expressed in the expansion of their powers in property and financial spheres. Educational organizations themselves must realize the value of autonomy, starting with the formulation of their mission, which is presented formally and not meaningfully in the charters of Russian universities. The mission of the article’s authors is seen in the ability to make independent decisions and be responsible for such decisions. The participation of a public entity in the functioning of universities today seems to be excessive: goal setting, state task, and state control should not suppress the autonomy of educational organizations. The use of various public resources may become a Solomon solution: supervisory and board of trustees, student government, internal financial audit, and others. Finally, the latest and far from the last challenges to the education system (digitalization, pandemic) are shifting the area of responsibility to the universities themselves, which will have to make operational decisions based on their vision of the current situation. For this to occur, educational organizations need to understand the degree of their autonomy.