Speaking as a shitbag, I downloaded "the science, ethics and law," and it turned out to be a highly polemic paper by can-you-guess-who?
The problem with it is the poor dear author and collaborator seem not to grasp what CAS actually is, falsely characterising it as a 'supreme authority' that acts upon its own precedents.
It is, rather, as the name strongly implies, a quasi-judicial arbitration tribunal in which both sides agree to participate where there is a dispute.
To take some examples, CAS has no authority over Bosman, Kolpak and other ECJ rulings over eligibility and participation, USADA's BALCO investigation, the FBI's designation of FIFA as a collaborator with organised crime nor the subsequent federal Swiss prosecutions, et bleedin cetera.
As anyone who's done so much as an undergraduate module on international law knows, i.e, me, the whole sodding point of International Law is there is no supreme authority save the United Nations where the General Assembly's powers are extremely circumscribed and in practice of little value (see recent ruling on UK and Diego Garcia) or the Security Council where the P5 will use their vetoes to stop anything that affects their interests or those of their friends.
Pile of piffle. IOC can look at it again if they wish, on the basis of such evidence as comes to light.