It is certainly worth reading what the World Anti-Doping Agency published to exonerate itself on Tuesday evening European time. The interim report by the investigator Eric Cottier, whom it itself appointed and declared to be “independent”, regarding WADA’s handling of the 23 Chinese swimmers who delivered positive doping samples in January 2021, six months before the Tokyo Olympics, appeared on its website.
As a reminder: CHINADA, China’s anti-doping agency, declared the case to be a case of mass contamination with the heart drug TMZ, which is banned in sport and found its way into the body from a hotel kitchen. It did not open a case. When WADA found out about this, a few weeks before the games in Tokyo, it decided not to appeal against CHINADA’s decision. 13 of the 23 athletes competed in Tokyo, Zhang Yufei and Wang Shun won individual gold, as did the women’s freestyle relay. Eleven of the 23 want to win medals in Paris.
“Undeniably appropriate”
The “independent” investigator Eric Cottier, who was proposed to WADA by its auditor and who was the police chief of the canton of Vaud when Cottier was the canton’s attorney general, answered the questions that WADA had dictated to him for his report in line with WADA’s wishes: WADA’s decision was “undeniably appropriate”. So far, so expected: absolution.
It would be interesting to examine the actually relevant question: would a different decision by WADA, would the courage to appeal against CHINADA before the International Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) have been appropriate? It’s a pity that Cottier’s independence had its limits. Or was it? In section IV. 4. (d) of his report, Cottier allows himself two obiter dicta, opinions expressed in passing. They are quite significant. According to Cottier, athletes are protected from prosecution by WADA if the National Anti-Doping Agency does not open proceedings against them, especially if a large group of athletes is involved. And: an appeal before the CAS takes between six and eighteen months, sometimes longer. An appeal by WADA would therefore also have been disproportionate.
Inactivity of national anti-doping organizations is rewarded
Until now, sports associations and their officials, including lawyer Thomas Bach, President of the International Olympic Committee, had cited the short duration of proceedings as the raison d’être of sports arbitration rather than prosecution. And now the length of proceedings exonerates sports organizations that are overwhelmed by their task of putting a stop to doping?
Even more frightening is the look behind the barn door that Cottier opens with reference to CHINADA’s decision not to open proceedings against the Chinese swimmers. If you follow him, regardless of the Chinese assessment in this case, an abyss opens up: then the inactivity of national anti-doping organizations is rewarded. Then coordinated doping, cooperation between dopers and supposed doping fighters, is worthwhile in the sense of the glory that a top place in the medal table promises. Then WADA would not have intervened against state doping à la GDR. Then it would de facto be promoting doping, not fighting it.
Bernd Berkhahn, national coach of the German swimmers, said on Tuesday before the report was published that he had given up trying to understand the decisions made by WADA. The Olympic Games begin in two weeks. Berkhahn predicts protests from the swimmers. WADA will submit its report against this. One thing is certain: the Games will not be clean.
