Disciplinary Cases per Nation

Each federation configures its commission structure in TenantConfig. France runs a three-level commission de discipline (departement, regionale, nationale); Sweden uses Disciplinnamnd plus the RF Bestraffningsdomstol; Germany uses Sportgericht at Landes- und Bundesebene. The investigation process is configured as a sequence of steps with deadlines and responsible roles, so each tenant defines who investigates within how many days and what the escalation triggers are.

A per-nation sanktionskatalog stores the federation's sanction codes, types, durations, fines, and bans. Catalogue entries are filterable by category, sanction type, and minimum competition level, ensuring that a regional commission can only issue regional-level sanctions and that the available options match federation regulation. When a commission decides a case, the platform forces selection from the configured catalogue, eliminating ad hoc sanctions that can be challenged on appeal.

Appeals escalate along the configured chain (regional then national, or directly national depending on jurisdiction). For international cases where domestic appeals have been exhausted, the CAS appeal workflow takes over: the case state flow is filed, registered, under_review, hearing_scheduled, decided or withdrawn, with each transition stamped and document-trailed. The dashboard aggregates statistics across cases by status and category, sanction distribution, open-case aging buckets, appeal statistics, and average resolution days, giving each federation a real-time view of judicial throughput.

The anonymised public protocol exposes decided and closed cases via a public endpoint with all PII stripped: no player or club IDs, no reporter, investigator, attendees, or evidence URLs. Evidence counts replace evidence URLs so the public can see how substantive a case was without identifying parties. Federations publish protocols at their own cadence to satisfy transparency obligations while honouring privacy law.