Ethics & Compliance
UIPM Code of Ethics
UIPM Court of Arbitration (cases from 2018)
According to article 6.2 of the UIPM Code of Ethics, "Appeals against disciplinary decisions of the Disciplinary Panel may be made to the UIPM Court of Arbitration. Article 7.1 states that "The UIPM Court of Arbitration is an independent institution made up of one or three arbitrators (‘the Court’). The Court shall comprise three arbitrators unless the parties agree to proceed with one. One of the members of the Court must have at least 7 years post qualification legal experience." Appeals against decisions of the UIPM Court of Arbitration may be filed with the Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS), Lausanne (art 8.14).
UIPM Court of Arbitration rejects appeal filed by Danish Modern Pentathlon Association (MPADK)
On 2 February 2022, the UIPM Court of Arbitration announced its decision to dismiss an appeal filed by MPADK. The appeal was directed against the decision of the UIPM Executive Board (EB) dated 31 October 2021 to endorse the recommendations by the UIPM Innovation Commission to replace horse-riding with another discipline for the 2028 Olympic Games and to open the consultation process regarding this matter.
The Court emphasized that the UIPM EB decision did not entail any change of the UIPM Statutes or other UIPM Regulations and fully respected the competence of the UIPM Congress to decide on any such changes in the future. According to the UIPM Court of Arbitration, the UIPM EB acted within its competence stipulated in Articles 13.1 and 2 of the UIPM Statutes. Further, the Court stated that the decision by the 2021 UIPM Congress to ratify the challenged decision was validly taken and confirmed that the challenged UIPM EB Decision represented the will of the majority of the UIPM Members.
Court of Arbitration | File 1/2018
In 2018, the UIPM Court of Arbitration analysed and decided on File 1/2018. The President of the Court was Dr. Alfonso Parziale (ITA). The decision of File 1/2018 has been reported by Dr Parziale on 9 May 2018. The UIPM Court of Arbitration ruled in favour of the acknowledgement of the revision of the sanction decided by the Court of Arbitration for Sport Panel.
Disciplinary Cases from 2018
According to article 6.1 of the UIPM Code of Ethics, “Disciplinary power under this Code is exercised in first instance at the request of the UIPM Executive Board which shall appoint a committee of up to 3 persons (the “Disciplinary Panel”) who shall all be independent of the events in dispute (but who may be members of the Executive Board) to address them on such terms as the Executive Board prescribes."
Disciplinary case | File 1/2021
In 2021, a Disciplinary Panel was appointed by the UIPM Executive Board to analyse and decide on File 1/2021. The Panel Chair was Mr. Robert Stull, President of the NORCECA Confederation. The decision of File 1/2021 has been reported by Mr. Stull on 7 September, 2021. It was decided that the investigated party violated the UIPM competition rules, specifically rule 4.6.8, resulting in the following sanctions imposed on the investigated party:
The Panel upheld the decision of the UIPM Executive Board on 7 August 2021 to exclude the party from the remainder of the Olympic Games competition.
The Panel issued an official reprimand letter to the party and a warning that any reiteration of her behaviour could result in the removal of her UIPM Coaches Certification Programme (CCP) credentials and permission to coach at UIPM-sanctioned competitions.
The Panel ordered her to attend a coach education seminar at the appropriate level containing a Humane Treatment of Animals module at the earliest opportunity and prior to her participation in any UIPM-sanctioned competition.
Disciplinary case | File 1/2019
In 2019, a Disciplinary Panel was appointed by the UIPM Executive Board to analyze File 1/2019. The Panel Chair was Mr. Janusz Peciak, EB Member for Sport. The decision of File 1/2019 has been reported by Mr. Peciak on 6 December, 2019, resulting in the acceptance of the claim raised by the Claimant.
Disciplinary case | File 1/2018
In 2018, a Disciplinary Panel was appointed by the UIPM Executive Board to analyze File 1/2018. The Panel Chair was Mr. Christian Keidel, also a member of the UIPM Ethics Commission. The decision of File 1/2018 has been reported by Mr. Keidel on March 25, 2019, resulting in a warning to the investigated party.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement
The UIPM Code of Ethics clarifies in Art. 2.2 to 2.7 conditions for submitting a Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statement (CIDS) as well its scope, procedures, and particular situations. In 2022, all people listed in article 2.4 of the Code of Ethics presented their CIDS.
The link for the CIDS to be signed can be found here.
UIPM Codes of Conduct
Athletes, Coaches and Judges Codes of Conduct have been approved by the respective Committees during the 2019 Joint meeting held in Frankfurt (GER), from 19-20 Jan. After that, the codes have been sent to all NFs and disclosed also through the Chair of each Committee. In addition, the code is part of all UIPM education courses to athletes, coaches, and judges.
UIPM Athletes Code of Conduct
UIPM Coaches Code of Conduct
UIPM Judges Code of Conduct