iNADO Quarterly Report 1/2017 / Institute of National Anti-Doping Organisations (iNADO). - Bonn : iNADO, 2017 (See attached pdf-file for more information) This communication goes to iNADO’s 67 Members. iNADO is happy to answer any questions on your Institute’s activities. Please send your questions to email@example.com _________________________________________________ Contents: - New members - New iNADO Partnerships - iNADO Attendance at Anti-Doping Conferences/Meetings - iNADO Workshop - iNADO AGM - NADOs visited - NADOs Webinars - NADOs Board Meetings - iNADO Public Statements - iNADO Finances - iNADO Updates - iNADO Member Communications - Added Documents on iNADO Website - Other iNADO Projects and Activities
Welcome to Doping.nl, the
Anti-Doping Knowledge Center.
This site has been established to host information about doping in the broadest sense of the word, and about doping prevention.
The Anti-Doping Authority Netherlands (the Dutch Doping Authority for short) established this site and maintains it. The Doping Authority was founded in 1989 and it is one of the oldest NADOs in the world. Doping.nl was developed with financial support from the Dutch Ministry for Health, Welfare and Sport.
This website was established because of the importance that the Doping Authority and the Ministry attach to the dissemination of information relevant to doping prevention. Disclosing and supplying relevant information is one of the cornerstones in the fight against doping in sport. However, in practice, a significant amount of information is still not available, or only available to a limited group of users. We therefore decided to bring together all the relevant information in a single site: Doping.nl.
The Doping Authority aims to supply as much information through this website as possible on an ongoing basis. The information will be varied but will focus primarily on: WADA documents like the World Anti-Doping Code, the International Standards like the Prohibited List, Doping Regulations, scientific articles and abstracts, decisions by disciplinary bodies (mainly CAS decisions).As well as making documents available, the Doping Authority aims to supply searchable documents when possible, and to add relevant keywords to ensure easy access.
In the future, Doping.nl will also become a digital archive containing older information that is no longer available elsewhere.
This site has been designed for use by anti-doping professionals such as National Anti-Doping Organisations and International Federations but also for students, journalists and other people interested in the subject.
Recently added documents More »
In December 2016 Drug Free Sport New Zealand (DFSNZ) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the rugby player after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance higenamine. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand. The Athlete gave a prompt admission about the violation, stated that he had used out-of-competition the supplement ‘The One 2.0.' purchased in Australia and showed that the prohibited substance higenamine wasn’t mentioned on the label of the supplement. DFSNZ accepted that the Athlete’s violation was non intentional and that the supplement was contaminated as definied under the Rules establishing that his fault was not significant. Considering the circumstances in this case DFSNZ proposed a 9 month period of ineligibility. After an adjournment requested by the parties in April 2017 a joint memorandum was filed on behalf of DFSNZ and the Athlete. The Sports Tribunal of New Zealand considers the joint memorandum to be fair and decides on 3 May 2017 to impose a 9 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 22 September 2016.
Cycling Independent Reform Commission : Terms of Reference / Dick Marty, Ulrich Haas, Peter Nicholson, Brian Cookson, Martin Gibbs. - Cycling Independent Reform Commission (CIRC); International Cycling Union (UCI). - UCI, 2014 ____________________________________________________ 1.) The present Terms of Reference (ToR) are int~nded to set out the mandate of the UCI Cycling Independent Reform Commission (CIRC). 2.) The present ToR were drafted taking into account the Memorandum of Understanding signed between UCI and WADA on 15 January 2014 (MoU), the UCI Ad Hoe Regulations on the Cycling Independent Reform Commission adopted by the UCI Management Committee on 1st February 2014 (CIRC Regulations), the UCI AntiDoping Regulations (UCI ADR) and any other agreements entered into between the UCI and WADA concerning the CIRC and its mandate.
Hein Verbruggen - Circ / Hein Verbruggen. - 2014 ____________________________________________________ Hein Verbruggen (1941-2017), former International Cycling Union (UCI), states what in his opinion has occurred: 1.) The UCI has been – since the outstart some 50 years ago – and still is one of the forerunners of anti-doping; 2.) As regards my period as President from 1992 to 2005, I guarantee that there has never been a positive doping case that has not been treated according to the rules, nor has there been a policy of favouring riders or teams. The antidoping activities of the UCI were in the hands of persons of the highest ethical standards (professionals as well as volunteers); 3.) The poor image of cycling in terms of anti-doping is based on a wrong perception rather than on facts (by which I do not mean to play down the doping problem in cycling as shown by scandals such as Festina and Puerto and the many riders found positive by the UCI). The WADA and in particular its previous President Mr R. Pound have largely contributed to shaping that negative perception by means of an ongoing smear campaign often based upon sheer lies and false allegations. It is my conviction (and not only mine!) that Mr Pound has personal reasons of revenge; 4.) Mr Pound is to a large extent personally responsible for the fact that the WADA is a poorly performing anti-doping agency with a very low success record. The WADA’s performance has come under heavy criticism within the Olympic Movement. Mr Pound and the WADA’s management follow since years a mostly unreasonable and unjustified “naming and shaming” policy to keep away the attention of the WADA’s own failures. Especially the UCI and Cycling, also in the Lance Armstrong case (!), were used as scapegoats. These items are treated and documented in this report.