Amid debate over anti-doping rules, in appealing Shayna Jack’s ban, WADA joins Sports integrity Australia

Appeals which were lodged by two of the most powerful anti-doping bodies in the world against the two-year doping ban that has been passed along to Shayna Jack, a swimmer, drew to the close after three weeks.

Twelve hours after Sport Integrity Australia announced its appeal, the World Anti-Doping Agency affirmed to the Ticket that with the Court of Arbitration for Sport, it had registered its appeal in the early hours of 8th Tuesday morning. It can be apprehended that Shayna’s two-year suspension is quite easy on her even though WADA did not release any details.

In order to sporting athletes and level competitions, David Sharpe, SIA CEO has stated that WADA will ensure the playing level of the athletes. In the application of Anti-Doping conduct, WADA has to have clarity and consistency to provide the athletes with the best.

If a test is reported positive then according to the strict-liability world of anti-doping, it’s a four year long ban. In such cases the only way out is to convince the Court of Arbitration for Sport or the anti-doping tribunal that available precautions were applied to restrict the occurrence and the ingestion of the substance was accidental. In critical cases, the ban can be reduce from four years. Shayna Jack did the same and got the ban duration reduced.

If something contaminated is consumed such as meat or water or any other supplement, it will described by a casual observer other than an elite athlete, “unintentional cheating” innocent proof of doping. The experienced Sydney QC, Allan Sullivan heard Jack’s case as a single arbitrator. The CAS will select a panel to act as the president of the bench, the swimmer will elect the arbitrator and the appealing party will select one, combining all three will make a panel to hear the appeal. Experienced people say that the appeal takes longer around six months or so. Appeals are heard afresh or de-novo that is from the initial point. It is unlikely that Jack will ever be able to return to elite swimming as even if the appeal gets dismissed, she would already have served two years detached from the sport which can destroy her plan to resume in June 2021.

Each year, hundreds and millions of dollars are spent to fight against doping globally. In order to prevent athletes from succumbing to international cheating, any weakness in prosecution should be avoided to guarantee the most uncompromising deterrent possible.

Succumbing to anti-doping’s draconian regime, it is believed that innocent athletes are being rubbed out of sport. They are carrying the burden of the tag “drug cheat” for the rest of their lives which they may not deserve. Jack’s ban for two years have been commented as guilty and a doping offence by WADA’s founding President, IOC member Dick Pound.

Jack according to Dick got her ban reduced because the CAS panel announced that she was not at fault and an argument raised against that regarding the duration of the sanction. For the athletes who deliberately set out to cheat, the word “intentional” is for them according to the World Anti-Doping Code as mentioned by the arbitrator who delivered Jack’s case initially while the zealots of anti-doping disagreed. Many athletes previously face the same situation when they were tested positive with a very little amount of banned substances undetected previously. Dick clearly states that if an athlete turns out positive he/she is guilty but the question lies by what amount and in a way will cost the Australian relay team, its bronze medal in Olympics.