FIDE Code of Ethics

[Vladimir Drkulec]

A. Administrative Subjects / 08. FIDE Code of Ethics /
08. FIDE Code of Ethics


Approved by the 1989 General Assembly. Amended by 1996 Presidential Board as directed by 1996 General Assembly.


1.
Introduction


1.1
The game and concept of chess is based on the assumption that everyone involved / concerned observe existing rules and regulations and attaches the greatest importance to fair play and good sportsmanship.


1.2
It is impossible to define exactly and in all circumstances the standard of conduct expected from all parties involved in FIDE tournaments and events, or to list all sets which would amount to a breach of the Code of Ethics and lead to disciplinary sanctions. In most cases common sense will tell the participants the standards of behavior that are required. If any participants in a FIDE event has any doubt as to the conduct which is expected of him or her, the FIDE officials present should be contacted or the local organizer who has been put in charge of the event.





1.3
Disputes arising during a game or tournament shall be resolved in accordance with the rules of play in existence at the time and with the tournament regulations.


1.4
This Code of Ethics is applicable to:


FIDE office bearers,
member federations, delegates and counselors,
affiliated organizations
organizers, sponsors
all competitors in FIDE registered tournaments.
This Code of Ethics shall govern what action may be taken against any person (meaning either an individual or organization) who deliberately or through gross negligence violate the rules and regulations of the game or neglect to observe the precepts of fair play.


2.
Breach of Ethics


The Code of Ethics shall be breached by a person or organization who directly or indirectly


2.1
offers, or attempts to offer or accepts any consideration or bribe with a view of influencing the result in a game of chess or election into FIDE office.


2.2
in other respects acts contrary to this Code.


2.2.1
Of particular importance in this respect are the following:


Fraudulence in the administration of any FIDE office or national federation office that affects other federations.


2.2.2
Office bearers who through their behavior no longer inspire the necessary confidence or have in other ways become unworthy of trust.


2.2.3
Organizers, tournament directors, arbiters or other officials who fail to perform their functions in an impartial and responsible manner.


2.2.4
Failure to comply with normally accepted standards of courtesy and chess etiquette. Misbehavior of a personal nature which is generally unacceptable by normal social standards.


2.2.5
Cheating or attempts at cheating during games and tournaments. Violent, threatening or other unseemly behavior during or in connection with a chess event.


2.2.6
Players withdrawing from a tournament without valid reason or without informing the tournament arbiter.


2.2.7
Gross or repeated violations of FIDE Laws of Chess or other approved tournament regulations.


2.2.8
In any top level tournament, players, delegations or teams must comply with a high standard dress code. Delegations includes both a player`s seconds and any other individual who the player allows to conduct business on behalf of the players. Players are responsible for the actions of acknowledged members of their delegations.


2.2.9
Players or members of their delegations must not make unjustified accusations toward other players, officials or sponsors. All protests must be referred directly to the arbiter or the Technical Director of the tournament.


2.2.10
In addition, disciplinary action in accordance with this Code of Ethics will be taken in cases of occurrences which cause the game of chess, FIDE or its federations to appear in an unjustifiable unfavorable light and in this way damage its reputation.


2.2.11
Any conduct likely to injure or discredit the reputation of FIDE, its events, organizers, participants, sponsors or that will enhance the goodwill which attaches to the same.


3.
Sanctions


3.1
Breaches of the FIDE Code of Ethics shall be sanctioned whether acts of commission or omission, whether they have been committed deliberately or negligently, whether the breach constitutes an act or attempted act, and whether the parties acted as principle, participant, accomplice or instigator, aiding or abetting.


3.2
Breaches of the FIDE Code of Ethics are punishable by one or more of the following sanctions:


warning;
reprimand;
return of awards; fine, up to 25.000,00 US dollars
revocations of titles and sports results
social work;
ban up to 15 years on taking part in a chess competition, or in any chess-related activity, as a player, arbiter, organiser, or representative of a chess federation;
temporarily exclusion from membership or office.
3.3
If a sanction is imposed, the Ethics and Disciplinary Commission may examine whether there are grounds to totally or partially suspend the enforcement of the sanction, if the relevant circumstances allow it, in particular the previous record of the person sanctioned. By suspending enforcement of the sanction, the Ethics and Disciplinary Commission may subject the person sanctioned to a probationary period of anything from six months up to two years. If the person benefiting from a suspended sanction commits another breach during the probationary period, the suspension shall automatically be revoked and the original sanction completely applied and added to the sanction imposed for the new breach.


3.4
The sanction may be imposed by taking into account all relevant factors in the case, including the offender’s age, assistance and cooperation, the motive, the circumstances and the degree of the offender’s guilt.


3.5
The Ethics and Disciplinary Commission shall decide the scope and duration of any sanction.


3.6
Sanctions may be limited to a geographical area or to one or more specific categories of competitions or events (starting date).


3.7 Unless otherwise specified, the sanction may be increased as deemed appropriate if a breach has been repeated.
3.8 Where more than one breach has been committed, the sanction shall be based on the most serious breach, and increased as appropriate depending on the specific circumstances. In these cases, when determining the amount of a fine, the Ethics and Disciplinary Commission is not obliged to adhere to the general upper limit of the fine.
3.9 At the request of the Investigatory chamber -when nominated-, the Ethics and Disciplinary Commission may (immediately) take provisional measures (e.g. provisional sanctions) if a breach of the Code of Ethics appears to have been committed and a decision on the main issue may not be taken early enough. The Ethics and Disciplinary Commission may also issue provisional measures for preventing interference with the establishment of the truth. Provisional measures may be valid for a maximum of 75 days. In exceptional circumstances, the provisional measures may be extended by the Ethics and Disciplinary Commission for an additional period not to exceed 45 days. The duration of provisional sanctions shall be taken into account in the final decision.
4.
Administrative Procedures


4.1
Breach of the regulations of this code by any Federation or FIDE official shall be reported to the FIDE Secretariat.


4.2
Breach of the regulations of this code by any person shall be reported to and decided by the FIDE Ethics and Disciplinary Commission.


4.3
The proceedings shall be recorded in writing. Grounds must be given for any decisions taken and these must also be in writing.


4.4
Appeals against decision taken by any FIDE official can be submitted to the FIDE Ethics and Disciplinary Commission. The appeal must be sent by registered mail together with a deposit of Two Hundred Fifty U.S. Dollars (US$250). The deposit will be returned should the appeal to all intents and purposes prove to be justified.


4.5
Any decisions made by the Ethics and Disciplinary Commission may be the object of appeal arbitration proceedings in accordance with the Code of sports-related arbitration of the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne, Switzerland.


4.6
The time limit for appeal is twenty-one days following the communication of the decision concerning appeal. All recourse to ordinary courts is excluded.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

ETHICS COMMISSION _- PROCEDURAL RULES
1. Register of cases
All complaints and reports concerning violations of the FIDE Code of Ethics shall be addressed to
the FIDE Ethics Commission (hereafter called the “EC”) through the FIDE Secretariat. The FIDE
Secretariat will transmit copy of them to the Chairman of the EC.
A Register of the cases of the EC is set up at the office of the FIDE Secretariat.
The Chairman of the EC will communicate to the FIDE Secretariat the name and the progressive
number assigned to each case.
2. Language
The working language of the EC is English.
The EC shall, at the request of any party, authorize a language other than English to be used by the
parties involved. In that occurrence, the EC may order any or all of the parties to bear all or part of
the translation and interpreting costs.
The EC may order that all documents submitted in languages other than English shall be filed
together with a certified translation in the language of the procedure.
3. Notifications and Communications
All notifications and communications that the EC intend for the parties shall be made through the
FIDE Secretariat.
All communications that the parties intend for the EC shall be made through the FIDE Secretariat.
4. Representation and Assistance
The parties may be represented or assisted by persons of their choice. The names, addresses,
telephone and facsimile numbers, e-mails addresses of the persons representing the parties shall be
communicated to the FIDE Secretariat.
5. Intervention
If a FIDE Federation, a FIDE Organ or any other person has an interest in a case submitted to the
competence of EC, it may submit to the EC memorials and documents.
6. Rights of the Parties
Each person charged with a violation of the FIDE Code of Ethics has the right to be informed in
writing (whether by letter, e-mail or otherwise) of the pending case before the final decision of the
EC and has the right to present to the EC memorials and documents in support of his/her/their
position.
Each party has the right, within the limits provided by art. 8, to ask to appear in front of the EC in
an oral hearing.
7. Submissions of Documents and Written Procedure
The Chairman of the EC will fix a term, normally at least twenty days, for the submission of
memorials and documents, failing which no further documents will be accepted by the EC. This
term may be prolonged, if requested. Expired this term, the EC may decide upon the case.
Documents may be submitted even by e-mail.
The EC may acquire documents and statements, i.e. from FIDE organs, FIDE Federations, arbiters,
players, organisers, tournament directors.
8. Hearing
The procedure before the EC comprises an oral hearing only if the EC deems it appropriate and
necessary.
Each party is responsible for all the costs directly or indirectly associated with their presence.
If a party asks for a hearing and the EC deems it not necessary, the party insisting on having the
hearing will be required to pay a fee as a contribution for FIDE expenses and for the expenses of the
other parties, in the event he loses the case. An appropriate amount of money to cover these
expenses must be posted with FIDE Secretariat prior to the hearing.
The Chairman of the EC shall issue directions relating to the hearing and, in particular, he shall set
the hearing date.
The hearing shall be public, unless the EC decides otherwise.
The Chairman of the EC shall conduct the hearing and ensure that the statements made are concise
and limited to the subject of the case.
The EC may exceptionally authorize the hearing of witnesses and experts, even via tele- or videoconference.
Minutes shall be made at each hearing.
9. Judgement
The deliberations of the EC shall be taken in private and remain secret.
All questions shall be decided by the majority of the members present.
The quorum for the judgment shall be of at least three members.
In the event of an equality of votes, the Chairman of the EC shall have the right to cast the decisive
vote.
The judgment shall state in a written form the reasons on which it is based. It shall contain the
names of the members of the EC who have taken part in the decision.
If the judgment does not represent in whole or in part the unanimous opinion of the members of the
EC who heard the matter, any dissenting member shall be entitled to deliver a separate opinion.
A written copy of the judgment of the EC shall be delivered to each party (by letter, e-mail or
otherwise) no later than twenty days after the judgement.

[Kevin Pacey]

I'm not clear on whether e.g. a Canadian class player who has a low FIDE rating can now be fined up to $25,000 by FIDE for some ethics infraction that said player makes in a typical lowly Canadian weekend swiss event that also happens to have at least their section FIDE rated. Also, who agreed to allow FIDE to fine them when they first got a FIDE membership, if before this new code of ethics?

[Aris Marghetis]

Thanks for posting this Vlad.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

I'm not clear on whether e.g. a Canadian class player who has a low FIDE rating can now be fined up to $25,000 by FIDE for some ethics infraction that said player makes in a typical lowly Canadian weekend swiss event that also happens to have at least their section FIDE rated. Also, who agreed to allow FIDE to fine them when they first got a FIDE membership, if before this new code of ethics?

It is unlikely that an individual player would be fined except for cheating or something like assaulting an opponent or unsportsmanlike conduct. Thinking back near the beginning of my chess career, as team captain at an Ontario High School Championship at New College in Toronto in 1976 or possibly 1975 one of my teammate's opponent threatened to beat him up if he won a game that he was clearly winning. The losing player was bigger than our teammate but not bigger than me. I informed him that he would not be fighting with our teammate alone but with all of us and that the outcome would not be what he thought it would be. When the game ended the opponent quickly exited the hall. I can't remember exactly what I said but it must have made an impression.

I suspect that threatening an opponent might fall under the guidelines.

FIDE would not have the ability to enforce a fine but the player would not be able to play in a FIDE rated event until the fine was paid. I suspect that any behaviour that might draw a FIDE fine would also draw a sanction from the CFC as well.

[Aris Marghetis]

It is unlikely that an individual player would be fined except for cheating or something like assaulting an opponent or unsportsmanlike conduct. Thinking back near the beginning of my chess career, as team captain at an Ontario High School Championship at New College in Toronto in 1976 or possibly 1975 one of my teammate's opponent threatened to beat him up if he won a game that he was clearly winning. The losing player was bigger than our teammate but not bigger than me. I informed him that he would not be fighting with our teammate alone but with all of us and that the outcome would not be what he thought it would be. When the game ended the opponent quickly exited the hall. I can't remember exactly what I said but it must have made an impression.

I suspect that threatening an opponent might fall under the guidelines.

FIDE would not have the ability to enforce a fine but the player would not be able to play in a FIDE rated event until the fine was paid. I suspect that any behaviour that might draw a FIDE fine would also draw a sanction from the CFC as well.

Chess bullying, gotta love it!

I remember decades ago, the first time I played Hal in a tournament (hadn't met him yet), I thought, geez this guy has way bigger arms than the rest of us lol

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Chess bullying, gotta love it!

I remember decades ago, the first time I played Hal in a tournament (hadn't met him yet), I thought, geez this guy has way bigger arms than the rest of us lol

When I think back on it there were two of them doing the threatening, possibly the team captain. Three of the four players on our team including the bullied guy were in the army reserve summer program and a couple were in a fairly effective karate program. I remember being very pissed off and following the threatening individuals but they took off very quickly such that when I got outside they couldn't be seen anywhere even though I was only a few seconds behind them. I finished second in that tournament.

[Pierre Dénommée]

Most Canadians are NOT subject to this Code of Ethic because they only play in CFC and FQE rated competition. The sole cheater that the FQÉ has caught did not cheat in any FIDE rated competition and couldn't be punished under this code.

Furthermore, minor cheating case are usually referred by FIDE to the CFC for punishment. This is the new fair play rules. "All cheating incidents occurring in tournaments that require maximum and increased levels of protection (as defined in the Anti-Cheating Protection Measures) must be reported to ACC. However, ACC may decide to refer a cheating incident occurred in such tournaments to a National Federation (NF)." http://fpc.fide.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Anti-Cheating-Regulations-2018.pdf

We must have our own Ethic Commission to deal with Ethic cases before FIDE sends us a case.

[Kevin Pacey]

What I'm a bit concerned with is, say, in a lowly 5-round weekend swiss event, a Canadian class player (who happens to be playing in a FIDE-rated section) decides to withdraw from the event. If I am reading the new FIDE ethics code right, this could be deemed an ethics violation by FIDE. However, I'd think that properly such a withdrawal case should not appear for consideration before the CFC (let alone FIDE), and said Canadian class player should certainly not get e.g. an email from the CFC (or FIDE) about the withdrawal from a minor swiss. Trickier might be a withdrawal from a round-robin event where that could affect prizes and standings, e.g. in the Toronto Closed, but at least that could be seen as a round-robin of some significance, and not, say, a local club round-robin that happens to be FIDE-rated.

[Aris Marghetis]

What I'm a bit concerned with is, say, in a lowly 5-round weekend swiss event, a Canadian class player (who happens to be playing in a FIDE-rated section) decides to withdraw from the event. If I am reading the new FIDE ethics code right, this could be deemed an ethics violation by FIDE. However, I'd think that properly such a withdrawal case should not appear for consideration before the CFC (let alone FIDE), and said Canadian class player should certainly not get e.g. an email from the CFC (or FIDE) about the withdrawal from a minor swiss. Trickier might be a withdrawal from a round-robin event where that could affect prizes and standings, e.g. in the Toronto Closed, but at least that could be seen as a round-robin of some significance, and not, say, a local club round-robin that happens to be FIDE-rated.

I find that Organizers are generally reasonable people. Like if a player decides to start driving home early from a weekend Swiss, and so he withdraws before pairings are published for the last round, I think that's totally fine. If I'm missing something here, please reply. Genuine ethics violations hit people in the face.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Why have you posted this here?

It is still available at FIDE website with all documents. https://handbook.fide.com/chapter/FIDECodeOfEthics
The EoC is not new or updated recently.



4. Representation and Assistance
The parties may be represented or assisted by persons of their choice. The names, addresses, telephone and facsimile numbers, e-mails addresses of the persons representing the parties shall be
communicated to the FIDE Secretariat.

This raises a question if the FIDE acted ethically in A.Kovalyov case. As I recall the hearing did not proceed as Anton had not signed a representation letter because nobody asked him to do that.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

What I'm a bit concerned with is, say, in a lowly 5-round weekend swiss event, a Canadian class player (who happens to be playing in a FIDE-rated section) decides to withdraw from the event. If I am reading the new FIDE ethics code right, this could be deemed an ethics violation by FIDE.

While that is true regarding the ethics violation by FIDE but innocent until proven guilty. The FIDE will not take a national case until the case is processed inside the national federation.


"26.9 The Ethics and Disciplinary Commission shall have jurisdiction over cases within a national sphere only if:
- the case on which the alleged violation is based has international implications or affects various national Member Federations of FIDE and has not been judged at national level through the national federation’s own ethics process;
- the national ethics process has operated in a manner that in itself is a breach of the FIDE Ethics and Disciplinary Code or of the fundamental principles of law and fair trial."

This is in the Charter available only as the PDF at https://handbook.fide.com/chapter/FIDECharter2020

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Why have you posted this here?

It is still available at FIDE website with all documents. https://handbook.fide.com/chapter/FIDECodeOfEthics
The EoC is not new or updated recently.




This raises a question if the FIDE acted ethically in A.Kovalyov case. As I recall the hearing did not proceed as Anton had not signed a representation letter because nobody asked him to do that.

I do not think that FIDE acted ethically in that case. I brought the case up with now FIDE president Arkady Dvorkovich during his campaign in 2018. Anton decided not to pursue the case in part because they were insisting that he present himself at a hearing in Europe. He was a student in a demanding course of computer studies at the time in which he had already missed some time due to his success in the World Cup tournament which led to the controversial incident. He did not trust FIDE to deal fairly with his situation. That was a reality based belief.

If Anton had wished to proceed, he would have signed such a letter and we would have proceeded with an appeal which in all likelihood would not have changed anything. The whole idea that a federation could not represent its own player without some such letter was clearly a manufactured pretense. "Dealing a Jack from the back of the pack, they said you lose again" - Al Stewart.

There was much hay made in the last CFC election about an ethics committee despite the rules having been passed fifteen years ago and modified at one point and not a peep in at least nine years on the topic by the people raising it as a failing of my leadership.

The lack of an ethics committee is not really a compelling topic as one of the top five things that we should be working on. However, for those who are interested in the topic a good place to start is to look at what FIDE says on the topic and what our CFC rule is and perhaps what other chess federations say about the topic. Those who made hay of this topic in the campaign are noticeably absent from the discussion but that is not surprising.

[Kevin Pacey]

What I don't get is why for decades I and others have been able to withdraw from CFC+FIDE rated Ottawa weekend swiss sectional events, with no questions asked by an organizer/TD regarding what excuse I might have. I (and others) have often simply withdrawn from such a swiss event because we were having a lousy tournament. Fwiw, I've never been hassled by the CFC (or FIDE) about it, such as by an email.

No, it seems clear to me that scores of Canadian chess players, including myself, are being implicitly called unethical by FIDE in this regard.

FIDE. Who are these body cavities? :mad:

[Aris Marghetis]

What I don't get is why for decades I and others have been able to withdraw from CFC+FIDE rated Ottawa weekend swiss sectional events, with no questions asked by an organizer/TD regarding what excuse I might have. I (and others) have often simply withdrawn from such a swiss event because we were having a lousy tournament. Fwiw, I've never been hassled by the CFC (or FIDE) about it, such as by an email.

No, it seems clear to me that scores of Canadian chess players, including myself, are being implicitly called unethical by FIDE in this regard.

FIDE. Who are these body cavities? :mad:
Kevin, I think you're causing concern for your self needlessly. The situations you describe seem like common-sense situations, where for decades, Organizers/TDs thank the player for advising them of their departure, don't pair them, and they get to clean up one more board setting earlier lol. I really think that the new FIDE guidelines apply to players who leave even after being paired, or worse, leave round-robins. Vlad or anyone else from the Executive, do you agree with my view?

[Vladimir Drkulec]

Kevin, I think you're causing concern for your self needlessly. The situations you describe seem like common-sense situations, where for decades, Organizers/TDs thank the player for advising them of their departure, don't pair them, and they get to clean up one more board setting earlier lol. I really think that the new FIDE guidelines apply to players who leave even after being paired, or worse, leave round-robins. Vlad or anyone else from the Executive, do you agree with my view?

I agree with your assessment, Aris.

[Vladimir Drkulec]

http://www.uschess.org/index.php/Governance/Code-of-Ethics-of-the-US-Chess-Federation-US-Chess.html



Code of Ethics of the US Chess Federation (US Chess)
http://www.uschess.org/images/M_images/printButton.png (http://www.uschess.org/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7538&pop=1&page=0&Itemid=189)
http://www.uschess.org/images/M_images/emailButton.png (http://www.uschess.org/index2.php?option=com_content&task=emailform&id=7538&itemid=189)




Governance (http://www.uschess.org/index.php/Governance/)


CODE OF ETHICS OF THE US CHESS FEDERATION (US Chess)
Revised August 2018 with revisions below in Red Text - Posted September 10, 2018 - Printer friendly version (http://www.uschess.org/docs/gov/reports/codeofethics.pdf)

PURPOSE AND SCOPE

1. The purpose of this code of ethics is to set forth standards to which the conduct of players, tournament directors, sponsors, and other individuals and entities participating in the affairs of the United States Chess Federation (US Chess), including tournaments and other activities sponsored by or sanctioned by US Chess, should conform; to specify sanctions for conduct that does not conform to such standards; and to specify the procedures by which alleged violations are to be investigated and, if necessary, the appropriate sanctions imposed.

2. The standards, procedures, and sanctions set forth in this code of ethics are not equivalent to criminal laws and procedures. Rather, they concern the rights and privileges of US Chess membership, including, but not limited to, the privilege of participating in tournaments, events, or other activities as a member of US Chess.

3. The standards, procedures, and sanctions set forth in this code of ethics shall apply only to actions and behavior by:

(A) members of US Chess, that occur in connection with tournaments or other activities sponsored by or sanctioned by US Chess; and (B) individuals and entities acting in an official capacity as officers or representatives of US Chess. This code shall not apply to actions or behavior by employees of US Chess acting in the scope of their duties. Such actions fall instead under the province of the Executive Board.

4. Each member of US Chess and each participant in a US Chess activity shall be bound by this code of ethics.
THE US CHESS ETHICS COMMITTEE
5. The US Chess Ethics Committee is appointed in accordance with procedures consistent with the bylaws of US Chess. The committee exists to consider allegations of unethical conduct at or in connection with events sanctioned by US Chess, and allegations of unethical conduct involving US Chess and its activities, in accordance with the standards and procedures contained in this code. The committee will exercise all other duties as may be assigned by the Bylaws or by action of the US Chess Board of Delegates.
STANDARDS OF CONDUCT
6. The actions and behavior of players, tournament directors, sponsors, and other individuals and entities participating in US Chess activities, or in events sponsored by or sanctioned by US Chess, shall be lawful and in accordance with all US Chess rules and regulations, and consistent with the principles of fair play, good sportsmanship, honesty, and respect for the rights of others. The following is a list of examples of actions and behavior that are considered unethical. The list is not intended to be exhaustive, and any action or behavior that is unlawful or violates US Chess rules and regulations, or is inconsistent with the principles of fair play, good sportsmanship, honesty, and respect for the rights of others, may be considered to fall within the scope of this code of ethics.
(a) Intentional violations of tournament regulations, or of any other regulations pertaining to USCF activities and goals, particularly after being warned.

(b) Cheating in a game of chess by illegally giving, receiving, offering, or soliciting advice; or by consulting written sources; or by tampering with clocks; or in any other manner.

(c) Deliberately losing a game for payment, or to lower one's rating, or for any other reason; or attempting to induce another player to do so. Deliberately failing to play at one's best in a game, in any manner inconsistent with the principles of good sportsmanship, honesty, or fair play.

(d) Deliberately misrepresenting one's playing ability in order to compete in a tournament or division of a tournament intended for players of lesser ability; players with foreign ratings are expected to disclose those ratings.

(e) Participating in a tournament under a false name or submitting a falsified rating report.

(f) Participating in a tournament while under suspension.

(g) Purposely giving false information in order to circumvent or violate any rule or regulation or goal recognized by US Chess.

(h) Attempting to interfere with the rights of any US Chess member, such as by barring someone from entering a US Chess-sanctioned event for personal reasons. Generally, no individual should be barred from a US Chess-sanctioned event for which he or she meets the advertised qualifications, without appropriate due process, and then only for behavior inconsistent with the principles of this code and/or the rules of chess. If a ban on future participation is imposed, the individual should be notified of the ban prior to his attempting to appear at future events.

(i) Violating federal, state, or local laws while participating in activities that are associated with US Chess.
PROCEDURES
7. Any US Chess member may initiate procedures under this code of ethics by filing a complaint in a timely manner with the US Chess Ethics Committee. A good-faith deposit must be submitted by the complainant. The amount of the deposit shall be set by the US Chess Executive Director, who shall review it from time to time in consultation with the Ethics Committee. The deposit shall be returned unless the Committee rules that the case is frivolous. The Committee may determine whether to return the deposit even before it determines jurisdictional and merit questions. The Committee may also, by a two-thirds vote, accept complaints submitted without the deposit. Complaints submitted by a US Chess employee as a result of actions related to official US Chess activities shall not require the payment of the deposit.
In the case of any accusation that does not fall clearly under the Standards of Conduct above, the Ethics Committee shall have the authority to decide whether the alleged conduct is within the scope of the code of ethics. In the case of each alleged violation that is within the scope of the code of ethics, the following steps shall occur in a timely manner:
(a) A factual inquiry shall be made by the Ethics Committee, assisted as necessary by the US Chess staff. Previous findings of the Ethics Committee or other US Chess entities may be included among the evidence considered by the Ethics Committee, if relevant to the circumstances of the present case. As a part of such an inquiry, any person accused of unethical conduct shall have the right to examine the evidence against him or her, the right to respond to the accusation, and the right to produce written evidence in his or her behalf.

(b) When issuing a decision, the Ethics Committee will provide a rationale for its decision to the parties involved and to the Executive Board.

(c) Appropriate sanctions, if any, shall be recommended to the Executive Board by the Ethics Committee. In recommending sanctions, the Ethics Committee may consider any previous ruling or finding of the Ethics Committee, or other US Chess entity, pertaining to the past conduct of the person being sanctioned. In recommending sanctions, the person being recommended for sanctions must be informed of this fact. Any person against whom sanctions have been recommended shall be promptly notified. If appeals are filed, the Ethics Committee shall be promptly notified.

(d) Except as specified in 7(f) sanctions recommended to the Executive Board shall be deemed final unless appealed to the Executive Board by the person or persons upon whom the sanctions have been imposed, or upon the initiative of any member of the Executive Board. Such an appeal must be made within thirty days of the date that notification of recommended sanctions occurred, except that the Executive Board may extend the deadline for appeal if in its judgment an unavoidable delay in communications or other valid cause prevented a timely appeal. If an appeal has not been filed by the deadline the recommended sanctions shall be placed into effect. No appeals shall be permitted in cases where the Ethics Committee has found in favor of the respondent and has recommended no sanctions.

(e) Upon appeal, a review of the facts and the appropriateness of the recommended sanction shall be undertaken by the Executive Board. The person against whom the sanction has been recommended, as well as the person filing the initial complaint, shall be given notice of the time and place the Executive Board will review the case. The person against whom the sanctions have been recommended shall have the right to appear before the Board and present evidence from the record. Any person appearing before the Executive Board upon appeal may be represented by counsel with the permission and at the sole discretion of the Executive Board. In all appeals the recommended sanctions imposed by the Ethics Committee shall not be in effect until the appeal hearing is completed. The recommended sanctions shall be either confirmed, modified, or revoked by the Executive Board.

(f) If the person against whom sanctions have been recommended is a member of the US Chess Executive Board, he or she may not appeal the sanctions to the Executive Board but may appeal to the US Chess Board of Delegates at its next scheduled meeting.

(g) If any member of the Ethics Committee or of the US Chess Executive Board has a conflict of interest of any kind that might preclude objective participation in the consideration of any case, that person may not act in the capacity of a committee or board member on the case.

SANCTIONS:

8. The following are some of the sanctions that may be imposed as a result of the procedures specified above. In unusual cases, other appropriate sanctions may be imposed, or these sanctions may be varied or combined.

(a) Reprimand. A determination that a member has committed an offense warranting discipline becomes a matter of record, but no further sanction is imposed at the time. A reprimand automatically carries a probation of at least three months, or longer if so specified. If the member is judged guilty of another offense during the probation, he or she is then liable to further sanctions for both offenses.

(b) Censure. A determination that a member has committed a serious offense warranting discipline becomes a matter of record, but no further sanction is imposed at the time. Censure automatically carries a probation of at least one year, or longer if so specified. If the member is judged guilty of another offense during the probationary period, he or she is then liable to further sanctions for both offenses.

(c) Suspended sentence with probation. A determination is made that the member has committed an offense warranting discipline. When the discipline is imposed and execution thereof suspended, such suspension shall include probation for at least six months longer than the discipline imposed. If the member is judged guilty of another offense during this period, unless otherwise decreed, the original discipline shall be added to such new discipline as may be imposed for the new offense.

(d) Suspension. Suspension is a determination that the member has committed an offense warranting abrogation, for a specified period of time, of all membership rights and privileges.

(e) Expulsion. Expulsion is a determination that a member has committed an offense warranting permanent abrogation of all membership rights and privileges. An expelled member may be readmitted to membership only by the US Chess Executive Board or by the US Chess Board of Delegates.

(f) Exclusion from events. This is a more selective determination that a member has committed an offense warranting abrogation of the right to participate in certain specified events or activities.

9. If the person being sanctioned is a member of the US Chess Executive Board, the Ethics Committee may recommend to the Executive Board no sanctions other than censure or reprimand but may also recommend to the Board of Delegates other actions.

10. In the case of every sanction that involves suspension or expulsion, a member may not hold any office in US Chess or participate in any capacity in any event or activity sponsored by or sanctioned by US Chess.

11. The US Chess Business Office shall be informed in writing of all official determinations by the Ethics Committee and shall record any recommendations of any sanctions. The US Chess Business Office shall inform the Executive Board of any sanctions recommended.



Implementation and modification history: the previous Code of Ethics was replaced in its entirety with the above Code by DM 97-16/ADM 97-24 and passed as amended at the 1997 Annual Meeting. This Code of Ethics was further amended by DM 98-71/ADM 98-80 and the amendments were passed at the 1998 Annual Meeting. This Code of Ethics was further amended by DM 99-75/NDM 99-68 and the amendments were passed at the 1999 Annual Meeting. This Code of Ethics was further amended by DM 04-22/ADM 04-16, DM 04-23/ADM 04-17 and DM 04-25/ ADM 04-19 and the amendments were passed at the 2004 Annual Meeting. This Code of Ethics was further amended by DM 15-20/NDM 15-05 and the amendments were passed at the 2015 Annual meeting. This Code of Ethics was further amended by DM16-31/ADM 16-32, DM 16-51/ADM 16-49, DM 16-52/ADM 16-50, DM 16-53/ADM 16-51, DM 16-54/ADM 16-52, DM 16-59/ADM 16-58 and the amendments were passed at the 2016 Annual Meeting. This Code of Ethics was further amended by DM 17-32/NM 17-02, DM 17-43/ADM 17-36, DM 17-44/ADM 17-37 and the amendments were passed at the 2017 Annual Meeting. This Code of Ethics was further amended by DM 18-29/ADM 18-17 and the amendments were passed at the 2018 Annual Meeting.