Historically, SGBs have been given significant autonomy when organizing sporting competitions as well as regarding their internal structure and regulations. One explanation for this is the idea that (international) sports should not be subject to the political influence of specific states, and that athletes should be free to organize their activities according to the specific needs of their chosen sport. Liberals would also add that the absence of state interference serves the idea of self-government in an area where the possibility of attracting sponsors and the general public is an important metric of success. While in some states, the interference with domestic sports associations may be more pronounced, there is hardly any international law related to SGBs and sports. A notable exception is the area of doping where a traditional international treaty10 exists and an international body has been established, the World Anti-Doping Agency, although only in 1999 and with a hybrid character that falls short of a traditional international organization;11 it is funded equally by the Olympic Movement and Member Governments. Further, not only are international treaties and organizations absent from the field of sports, but also dispute settlement is largely left to the organizations themselves. The CAS was only created in 1984, and remains under the auspices of the Interna-tional Olympic Committee (IOC) with little interference by the state or international courts and tribunals.12 As the CAS is fundamental for safeguarding the (human) rights of athletes, it is a system that should be subject to close analysis, and many chapters of this volume directly address its structure and approach. Recent case law from the Swiss Federal Tribunal (which is the only national institution for challeng-ing arbitral awards by the CAS), and national courts relating to disputes settled by the CAS have shown that the autonomy of this system could be further challenged in the near future. What is particularly interesting from an IHRL perspective is the fact that governments are bound by specific international obligations while the sports world is allowed to largely organize itself; this is relevant for the role of the ECtHR with regard to Switzerland where the CAS is located.