Send to friend



  1. To supervise the competition and to deal with any breaches of discipline or any extraordinary circumstances affecting the running of the competition.
  1. Where there is a grave error of judgement on the part of one, or several judges, such action as they consider necessary will be taken.
  1. Continually, to review the marks awarded by the judges and to issue a warning to any judge whose work is considered to be unsatisfactory or showing partiality.
  1. Following the unsatisfactory result of any warning, to remove where necessary the offending judge.
  1. The athlete representative is a member of the Technical Committee but is not part of the Superior Jury
The Executive Committee has the authority to decide on the rules for the Superior Jury and the specific roles of the Technical Committee members during a competition.
Refer to the Appendix for the details and “Duties for Superior Jury and Supervisor”

The President of the SJ MUST:

Method of Intervention:

Monitor all scores for deviation from tolerance, and for impossible scores

Approve or advise action of SJ Members

Monitor all scores for judging bias and take appropriate action
Bias may be assessed during and after the event by analysis.
Bias is:

  • Inflating score of own federation and deflating nearest contender
  • Ignoring faults
Using marks to alter positions


During competition:  Give verbal warning and should it occur a second time, replace judge and follow-up with written warning

After competition :  Assessment made after the event which shows bias will result in a letter of warning or sanction, which must be sent  to the federation within six months after the competition


Arbitrate when SJ member, CJP and DJs cannot reach a decision

Refers to IRCOS or video as necessary and makes a final decision after consultation with the members of the SJ

Assure discipline of all persons, coaches, athletes, judges, superior jury, organisers, and volunteers in the competition arena.

Deals with unacceptable behaviour  (at any time and any where) of competitors, coaches, judges, organisers or volunteers during the event.


Initial approach normally is a verbal warning

A second incident or serious first incident will result in a written warning to the Head of Delegation and thereafter the federation and may result in a sanction in accordance with the Disciplinary Code. 


Receive inquiries in writing with appropriate fee

Within 4 minutes of appeal. This is given to the President of the Superior Jury who will respond through a written statement after the analysis.

Receive inquiries in writing with appropriate fee

Through the Expert or CJP, and in exceptional cases, a particular judge

All approaches are recorded and may result in warnings, if found that there is improper judging after analysis




Respect for the office held and expertise in the area of responsibility to assure the just application of rules and regulations.

The Superior Jury MUST:
Record a score for every exercise which will be used as a control score

Take part in the post competition analysis


Each score is recorded on a proforma and given to the President of Superior Jury after each round of competition.

2 days by taking a sample of exercises (by draw) and all TC members judging and making comparison against expert score and score agreed by CJP

he Superior Jury MUST intervene:

when: A Line judge has not seen a fault or for an impossible score  

when: an inquiry has been submitted

By placement of inquiry/accreditation card and verbal statement of problem
The appellant must submit a written statement within 4 minutes of the spoken appeal to SJ President with fee stated in TR

When there is a disagreement between the Difficulty Judges it goes to the CJP  to find an agreement.

If a judge chooses not to adjust a mark when requested to do so, the SJ may act to ensure the final mark awarded is correct.


- Respect for the expertise of office
- To receive pre-competition intensive preparation for judging with the Superior Jury and CJPs

BEFORE COMPETITION MUST: Attend all seminars, instructions and meetings at the times scheduled before, during and after the competition.

BEFORE COMPETITION MAY :Consult with the Superior Jury Difficulty Experts for help in resolving issues



• Be on time for march in led by the CJP to places and stay seated in places until the end of the whole round of competition
• Make swift ‘change over’ if needed
• Take seats during the award ceremony and stand to honour the medallists and flags


Take allocated breaks after a signal by the President of Superior Jury or following special request of the President (or CJP)

Be absent only with permission


Make independent judgements about the execution or artistry of an exercise according to the rules, without reference to books, previous scores, cell phone communication or talking to other judges


When a mistake is made, the judge must stand and wait for further instruction

Not engage in discussions with other judges while on the podium or discuss scores during breaks

Keep a record of judgements for performance with use of shorthand to assist explanation at any time by the relevant SJ expert.
Difficulty judges must independently evaluate the difficulty score before

collaborating with the second DJ to resolve any differences and arriving at a single score





Consult with the CJP if cannot resolve the Difficulty Score

Authority and Accountability

Authority and Accountability




The Superior Jury holds corporate responsibility for the justice of scores given for performances

The SJ President will give the SJ Members the right to intervene if a CJP has not observed the deviation rule, has not applied penalties correctly or cannot agree the Difficulty score with the DJs

Whenever the SJ is involved, the SJ is accountable for the score

CJP helps DJs

To resolve disagreement

DJs take responsibility if have not requested help of CJP and the score is incorrect



Once the CJP is consulted, all 3 take responsibility if a score is incorrect.

President gives warnings to judges (after personal judgement or after consideration of the advice of on SJ members)


Immediate verbal as soon as the matter comes to notice

In writing if serious or repeat of warnings, this is made with the agreement of the SJ (TC)


SJ takes joint responsibility

President gives warning to SJ member

Verbal first
Written if serious advice is taken from rest of SJ and later reported to FIG EC


President of Jury takes ultimate responsibility