Which states parties should be held responsible for the implementation of positive obligations under the ECHR in sports-related disputes?

Abstract In sports society, awareness of human rights protection has gradually developed and governing bodies, such as the International Olympic Committee (IOC) Fédération Internationale de la Football Association (FIFA), have striven to commit implementation guaranteed by internationally recognised right treaties in international community. However, law cannot directly impose any legal obligations on bodies because they are non-state actors established domestic private law. this situation, how can apply relationship between actors? According European Convention Human Rights (ECHR), state parties must implement positive protect individuals against violations caused within jurisdiction. To under ECHR, it is necessary identify which should be held responsible for sports-related disputes because, Mutu Pechstein v. Switzerland , athletes claimed a violation ECHR ground that Court Arbitration Sport (CAS) located Lausanne, Switzerland. considered not liable all ECHR’s another party. light this, purpose article hypothetical standard determining implementing ECHR.