IN 2004 ONE OF THE EXCUSES, THAT THE EAA MADE UP NOT TO HAVE A MEETING OF THE ANTI-DOPING WORKING GROUP, WAS THAT THERE WERE NO ITEMS TO DISCUSS.

I THEREFORE FORWARDED THE POINTS SHOWN BELOW, MOST OF WHICH I HAD ACTUALLY FORWARDED EARLIER TO THE EAA.

Georg Facius

PROPOSED ITEMS FOR A MEETING AGENDA

Harmonisation of the conduct and procedure of doping tests in Europe.

This includes also the items 3 a) and b).

– reference is made to the EXAMPLES mentioned under 1) below.

Compilation of information from the national federations concerning 1.

Advice and guidelines for the national federations

a) Guidelines for Doping Control Delegates to be finalized – see 2) below

b) Guidelines for Doping Control Stewards – see 3) below

Out-of-competition tests in Europe

a) A proposal to be drafted for the EAA Council

Preventive measurers and education

a) Seminar for Doping Control Delegates

b) Education of Doping Control Stewards

c) Cooperation with IAAF concerning doping related education

The abovementioned five points were agreed at the first meeting to be the main tasks of ADWG, however, nothing much has happened since then, and a meeting is definitely needed in order to be able to move on and thus to ensure that the ADWG, established by the Council, is not just becoming hot air.

Further points:

Doping Control Delegates at Permit Meetings - see 4) below
EPO testing – see 5) below
WMA anti-doping – see 6) below
Considerations concerning an anti-doping code/declaration to be signed by all athletes, officials, coaches, leaders etc.

10. The changes in IAAF Anti-doping Rules at the 2003 Congress – see 7) below

The World Anti Doping Code

PROPOSAL: Competence, rights and duties

The ADWG shall monitor the fight against doping within EAA and propose improvements to the Council.

The Committee shall propose relevant information and education, including education of Doping Control Delegates and Doping Stewards, and propose guidelines for these.

Particularly with regards to improving the uniformity of national procedures and regulations in accordance with the IAAF Doping Regulations, the Committee shall request information from the Member Federations to this effect, thereby establishing possible problems and difficulties to which EAA may offer advice and assistance.

The Committee shall go over the reports from the EAA competition officials and follow up on any irregularities concerning the doping control.

Comments

As the situation is now, the fight against doping is to a high degree left to IAAF, and to the Member Federations, with EAA playing a not so active role.

The result is that the doping control carried out at a number of competitions is not handled in accordance with the IAAF Regulations and Guidelines. There are many reasons for this, the most apparent being

that, bodies outside of IAAF and EAA are taking care of the actual control, and, willingly or unwillingly, are not abiding by the IAAF Regulations and Guidelines

that, doctors, nurses and officials involved in the doping control are not adequately informed about the Regulations and Guidelines and/or not adequately trained in acting at doping controls

that, competition organizers are not adequately familiar with the Regulations and Guidelines, and in some cases are even opposed to these

that, technical delegates or other EAA representatives in many cases shall also act as doping

control delegates, which is in itself quite a demanding task, if it shall be carried out properly.

As one of many consequences this may result in, that doped athletes are not being caught, or if caught, that they cannot be convicted of having committed a doping offence.

There is a therefore a very serious background for surveying all aspects of this, and consequently come up with improvements in the areas where it is needed.

At the last congress an anti-doping resolution was adopted, where EAA calls upon IAAF and the other Area Associations to intensify the fight against doping. If nothing else, we definitely feel that this puts EAA under an obligation also to intensify the efforts.

EXAMPLES

Outdated sampling bottles

In the opinion of the organiser samples provided by national athletes was not not the business of the EAA official

Meeting organiser wanted to chose the athletes for testing

Doping Control Officer not familiar with the sampling kit

Doping Control Officer wanted a copy of each completed doping form with all the information on, just to be able to document his required payment

No official accompanied the athletes into the toilet room

Meeting organiser protested strongly against not taking part in the selection of athletes

The meeting doctor wanted to participate in the selection, and wanted it done one day before the meeting. He was anxious to participate in the doping control because, in his opinion the doping control officer was inexperienced. On the day of the meeting it turned out that the control officer was very professional and that he had had that assignment at a former world championship

Doping stewards not instructed about their duties

Doping Control Officer allowed an athlete to leave the control station for a period of time, without being accompanied

Athlete left alone in the toilet room for a short period of time

Athletes notified too late, were not given their copy of the notification form and were left unattended

Only on one out of nine notifications was written the time of notification

A written protest on the doping control against the doping procedure was ignored

Of nine doping control forms only one was filled out correctly

None of the nine samples were tested for PH

Nobody knew who should take care of getting the samples to the laboratory

2) PROPOSAL

GUIDELINES FOR DOPING STEWARDS

REQUIREMENTS AND QUALIFICATIONS

Only mature persons, preferably over the age of 24, and with the necessary authority shall be appointed as Doping Stewards (DS). They must be adequately educated/experienced as doping stewards, and shall preferably be able to speak one or two major languages.

Male DS´ shall be appointed for men´s events and female DS´ for women´s events.

They shall be provided with an identity card displaying their function, and an accreditation which allows entry to absolutely all areas in and around the stadium.

They shall be provided with writing material which is not affected by water, including a board covered with plastic.

SELECTION AND SUMMONS FOR DOPING CONTROL

The selection takes place before the competition by selecting certain events and certain placings, and the names of the selected persons will therefore only be known after the events in question have finished. However, it may also occur that the Doping Control Officer (DCO) during the competition decides to test a specific athlete, or an athlete asks to be tested, having achieved a (national)record. Obviously, in these cases the selection will take place only after the event has finished, but the principles stated below will still apply.

Before the start of the selected events the DS will receive from the DCO the form “Notice To Athletes”, on which the necessary information has been written.

The DCO must inform on beforehand how to act in case of a tie for a selected placing (for instance: The athlete with the lowest bib number).

If an athlete selected for testing, is to participate in another event later the same day, he should not be notified until after he has finished that event.

Immediately after the selected event has finished, and the DS has ascertained which athlete has finished in the selected position, the DS shall approach the athlete as discreetly as possible, and present him with the notice form, and also inform him orally, as far as possible.

The DS shall write on the form the time when the athlete shall appear at the doping control at the latest, it being one hour after the time of the notification. The athlete shall fill out the notice form with name and nationality in block letters, and shall sign the form. The DS shall retain the original (front page), and the athlete shall be handed the copy.

ESCORT AND SURVEY

From the moment the above procedure has been finalised, and until the athlete has presented himself at the doping control station, the DS shall stay close to the athlete regardless of where he is going, and all the time the DS shall observe what the athlete might be doing.

If an athlete wishes to go to a toilet, this can only take place at the Doping Control Station, with a DCO accompanying him.

Should anything unusual occur during the period of escort, the DS shall make a note of it and inform the DCO on arrival at the doping control station, for example if the athlete:

- takes anything which may be medication

- receives anything, or hands over, anything from, or to, another person

- appears to place anything on or in his body

- changes his clothes

The DS shall not interfere with this, or with what the athlete otherwise is doing while being escorted, unless it in any way obstructs the DS in carrying out his duties.

The athlete is allowed to be accompanied to the Doping Control Station by one person only, normally a coach/leader or an interpreter.

The DS shall act in a friendly and correct manner, and except for relevant questions about time and place etc, he shall refer all questions to the DCO. The DS must not allow himself to be distracted, and must in a friendly manner, but with authority, oppose actions and reject protests which may interfere with the surveillance.

PROCEDURE AT THE DOPING CONTROL STATION

When the athlete has presented himself at the Doping Control Station and obtained contact with the DCO or another official at the Doping Control Station, it is the responsibility of the doping control officials to survey the athlete until the control procedure is finished completely. A DS may be appointed to survey the athletes in the waiting room, and the athletes are not allowed to leave the Doping Control Station until their respective doping control procedure is finished completely.

Only in extraordinary circumstances, and only in agreement with the DCO, may an athlete leave the Doping Control Station temporarily, and then only when being escorted by a DS in accordance with the above.

If there is no guard at the entrance to the Doping Control Station, the person(s) surveying the athletes in the waiting room shall see to it that no unauthorised persons are allowed access to the station.

EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES

If an athlete does not follow the above procedures, or refuses to follow them, or in any way obstructs the duties of the DS, or any other problems arises, the DS shall, if at all possible, take the athlete to the DCO. If that is not possible, the DS shall try to stay with the athlete and try to get assistance from other officials so that a doping control officer or the technical delegate can be summoned, and thereafter take over the responsibility for the situation.

7 January 2003

Georg Facius

3) PROPOSAL

Principles For The Selection And Management Of EAA Outdoor Permit Meetings.

9.3

An Official Representative, designated by the EAA, shall supervise the meeting in accordance with the Guidelines laid down by the EAA Council.

Normally the Representative should not be a citizen of the country where the Meeting is held. The organiser shall pay his travel expenses and his accommodation for up to three days.

9.4 (new paragraph – the following to be renumbered)

A Doping Control Delegate, designated by the EAA, shall supervise the doping control at the Meeting in accordance with the Guidelines laid down by the EAA Council.

Normally the Representative should not be a citizen of the country where the Meeting is held. The organiser shall pay his travel expenses and his accommodation for up to three days.

Principles For The Selection And Management Of EAA Indoor Permit Meetings.

An Official Representative, designated by the EAA, shall supervise the meeting in accordance with the Guidelines laid down by the EAA Council.

Normally the Representative should not be a citizen of the country where the Meeting is held. The organiser shall pay his travel expenses and his accommodation for up to three days.

4. (new paragraph – the following to be renumbered)

A Doping Control Delegate, designated by the EAA, shall supervise the doping control at the Meeting in accordance with the Guidelines laid down by the EAA Council.

Normally the Representative should not be a citizen of the country where the Meeting is held. The organiser shall pay his travel expenses and his accommodation for up to three days.

7 Januar 2003

Georg Facius

5)

INFORMATION OF THE OUTCOME OF

THE DANISH PROPOSALS FOR THE IAAF 2003 CONGRESS CONCERNING ANTI-DOPING

ALL THE PROPOSALS WERE ACCEPTED OR OTHERWISE INCLUDED

PROPOSALS TO AMEND IAAF ANTI-DOPING RULES

Rule 55.2 (iii)

An athlete admits having used, or taken advantage of, or having attempted to do so, a prohibited substance or a prohibited technique. (See also Rule 56).

Comments

In Rule 60.1 (iii) is included: “or having attempted”, so, obviously, it should also be included here..

Rule 56

Doping related Offences

An athlete who fails, or refuses, to submit to doping control, or fails, or refuses, to provide a blood sample, after having been requested to do so---

Any person assisting, or inciting, others, or attempting to do so, or admitting having assisted orincited others to use a prohibited substance---

Any person trading, trafficking, distributing or selling any prohibited substance, or attempting to do so, otherwise than in the normal course---

Comments

“Ancillary” means “in addition to, but not as important”.

In Rule 60.1 (iii) is included: “or having attempted”, and in (v) is included “the failure or refusal of an athlete to provide a blood sample”, and obviously should also be included in the above.

Rule 57.5

If an athlete declines to provide a sample, or otherwise---.

(“where” to be exchanged for “if” elsewhere in Rule 57 as appropriate)

Comments

It does not matter “where”, this is not about geography.

---indicates unwillingness to submit to doping control, on the basis that he has retired, such athlete will not be eligible to resume competition, until a period of two years has passed after the incident, and he has complied with the terms of Rule 57.6 concerning ineligibility for two years or more.

Comments

Rule 57.5 deals with an athlete who is evading an out-of-competition test, by stating that he has retired completely from competition, that is, has finished his career as an athlete. The Rule does not state clearly – if at all – which demands, or sanctions, must be met by the athlete, if he, at some point, wishes to resume his career

In Rule 60 “Sanctions” no sanction is specified concerning the above situation.

This means, that what is otherwise punished fully as a doping offence, namely denying to take a test, and resulting in two years suspension, is reduced – at the most - to undergo three tests over a period of eight months , if only the athlete states that he has retired --- before he starts competing again. This will be a major loophole for an athlete who has been caught on the wrong foot.

Rule 59.4 – last section

If the Member reinstates an athlete, and the Commission appointed by the Council---

(Delete: “after having held a hearing”).

Comments

The key issue is whether a Member reinstates, and thereby fails to impose sanctions, with or without a hearing having been held. The present Rule can only be applied if a hearing has been held.

Rule 59.5

If a Member has, under Rule 21.1, delegated, or has been obliged to delegate, the conduct of its hearing, or any subsequent hearings of any kind, to any body, committee or tribunal---

Comments

Hearings conducted by others may be imposed on Members, for instance by National Sports Federations or other national or international bodies, or by the laws of the country of the Member, and as a consequence there may be more than one “hearing” related to one doping case.

Rule 60.1

For the purpose of these Rules the following sanctions shall be imposed. (The rest of the paragraph to be deleted)

Comments

The text is more or less, but, as can be seen under the proposal for Rule 55 and 56 above, not completely, the same in 60.1 as in 55 and 56, and obviously there should be only one text about the same issue, in order to avoid such discrepancies, and to make the Rules less difficult to work with.

Rule 60.2 (a )

for an offence under Rule 55.2 (i) or 55.2 (iii) involving the substances---or for any of the other offences listed in Rule 55.2 and 56 :

Rule 60.2 (b )

for an offence under Rule 55.2 (i) or 55.2 (iii) involving the substances---

Rule 60.2 (c)

for an offence under Rule 56.4 involving any of the substances---

Rule 60.6

If an athlete has committed a doping offence under Rule 55.2 (iii) , then any result obtained---

Comments

Changes in consequence of the above corrections.

DANISH ATHLETIC FEDERATION

19^th August 2001

European Athletic Federation

Re. Proposals for the 17^th EAA Congress

Dear friends,

With reference to the Constitutional Rules 3 c) we hereby forward the following proposal for the decision of the Congress:

CONSTITUTIONAL RULES

Coming into effect on January 1^st 2002 an Anti-doping Committee shall be established in accordance with Rule 8 of the Constitution.

If accepted, the necessary elections shall take place at the 17^th EAA Congress.

Competence, rights and duties

The Committee shall monitor the fight against doping within EAA and propose improvements to the Council.

The Committee shall propose relevant information and education, including education of Doping Control Delegates and Doping Stewards, and propose guidelines for these.

The Committee shall go over the reports from the EAA competition officials and follow up on any irregularities concerning the doping control.

Comments

As the situation is now, the fight against doping is to a high degree left to IAAF, and to the Member Federations, with EAA playing a not so active role.

that, bodies outside of IAAF and EAA are taking care of the actual control, and, willingly or

unwillingly, are not abiding by the IAAF Regulations and Guidelines that, doctors, nurses and officials involved in the doping control are not adequately informed about the Regulations and Guidelines and/or not adequately trained in acting at doping

controls

that, competition organizers are not adequately familiar with the Regulations and Guidelines, and in some cases are even opposed to these

that, technical delegates or other EAA representatives in many cases shall also act as doping

control delegates, which is in itself quite a demanding task, if it shall be carried out properly.

As one of many consequences this may result in, that doped athletes are not being caught, or if caught, that they cannot be convicted of having committed a doping offence.

There is a therefore a very serious background for surveying all aspects of this, and consequently come up with improvements in the areas where it is needed.

Kind regards,

DANISH ATHLETIC FEDERATION

Thomas Thomsen Georg Facius

President International Advisor

Del siden på Facebook