Het IAAF houdt een conference call met media over de dopingproblematiek in Rusland.
Samenvatting staat hier:
http://www.iaaf.org/news/(...)passport-russian-banquote:
Is there a point at which the Russian Athletics Federation could be suspended?
At present there are allegations from the TV documentary and we’re studying them carefully, but we can’t jump to conclusions. Our job is to protect clean athletes and this is not the right time to tackle banning a federation. If there are any problems with athletes, coaches or administrators in the federation, then our job is to root them out. We are working in coordination with WADA and our ethics committee. We have a duty to pursue and investigate individual cases and to report to the IAAF Council for follow-up at the institutional level.
Will there be more instances of banning coaches?
Doping is rarely an isolated case. Very often, there are one or two coaches behind it as part of a doping ring, either big or small. In the new WADA code, there is now an obligation to investigate coaches who have more than two athletes involved in a doping offence.
As an example, there were between 45 and 50 cases of doping in Turkey. We told the Turkish federation that they needed to interview every athlete and find out the source. They did exactly that and ended up banning nine coaches.
We need the support of athletes to give more information surrounding their doping offence and the support of federations to apply sanctions when justified.
What power does the IAAF have to go into countries and improve matters? Do you have the power to exclude a country?
We are educating athletes so they can speak to us. We can refer cases to CAS if a federation does not act upon reliable information sent to them. We can also ask WADA or the local national anti-doping agency for support.
If there is sufficient evidence of a coach, we can oblige a federation to investigate and rule on the case. If we don’t agree with the federation, we can appeal to CAS.
Will the IAAF appeal the recent decisions rendered by RUSADA against seven elite Russian athletes?
The IAAF will carefully review these decisions within the next two to three weeks and then decide whether IAAF rules were correctly applied for each case. While the selective disqualification of results may be accepted under the new IAAF rules (and the WADA Code), we will have a close look at each profile and decide, upon consulting our scientific and legal experts, whether the decisions should be appealed and on what ground.
Is there a timeline on the investigation of the Russian doping system being completed?
WADA is currently investigating the whole system of Russian sport. They are looking into lab testing, officers, the ministry of sport and it is expected to be completed by the end of 2015. The IAAF is purely tackling the problem of doping in athletics. We have a duty to pursue the alleged doping in the documentary but we have to be respectful of the WADA process.
Could the length of the disciplinary procedures be reduced?
Yes, for cases involving urine samples, we are working at reducing the length of the proceedings and we amended our rules recently. We believe that the conclusion of a straight-forward doping case should not take more than three to four months.
Our role at the IAAF is to gather and analyse evidence during an ‘instruction phase’ and pass that on to the federation for adjudication. However, passport cases take longer than a straight-forward urine test. It requires several stages, including consultation with a panel of experts, allowing the athlete to give an explanation and giving them time to consult with their own panel of experts. It’s a very long process from day one to the final conclusion. It’s frustrating from everyone’s point of view, but we believe it is a fair process.
Were some of these positives – for example, Liliya Shobukohova’s – going to come out had it not been for the TV documentary?
We were after Ms Shobukhova for a while, even before starting the passport. We tested her, we built up a profile; not WADA, not the Russians, we did. We targeted her at competitions. We sent a profile to our expert panel and they unanimously decided there was a case to answer, so we sent it to the Russian Federation for adjudication and we now appealed the two-year sanction to CAS because we believe that an increased sanction should be applied in her case. There was never a cover-up of this case. It's a transparent process.
Regarding the other allegations, this is being investigated independently by the IAAF Ethics Commission.
We have also entered into a partnership with the World Marathon Majors for enhanced testing of elite marathon runners.
Is there a definitive percentage of number of times IAAF followed up target testing following suspicious blood samples and did they have the resource?
We started testing blood samples in 1993 and were the first federation to test. In 2001 we started doing blood testing on a wider scale. EPO testing came about in 2000 through blood and urine tests which provided vast data. We conducted about 8000 blood tests from 2001 to 2009.
During this period, the blood testing identifies individuals with atypical profiles. This is not in itself evidence of doping, but only an indication to assist us in fine-tuning our testing programme. We have used the blood tests to gather and create intelligence testing. We tailor testing programmes to individual athletes.
Regarding specific individuals, we have never been given a list, nor has WADA, despite having requested it, so we can’t respond to this list. We hope to be able to have a fair chance to respond to the allegations with respect to that list.
Did you have sufficient resources to test when you first created biological passports?
Yes we had the resources at the time and we actually conducted proper follow-up testing. However, we were limited by the limits of the science (narrow detection windows for substances like EPO) and by logistical constraints (conducting no-advance-notice out-of-competition tests in remote places in Africa). This situation created a lot of frustration but allowed us to target specific athletes when we officially launched the Athlete Biological Passport in athletics in 2009. This is partly why the IAAF has, to date, sanctioned more athletes than all other anti-doping organisations put together.
Is Russian race walking coach Viktor Chegin under investigation?
Yes. We have a procedure to follow, but the case is being investigated. We need to find evidence to support the data and if the federation does not act, we can provisionally suspend a coach. But we have to be respectful of the WADA process as Chegin may be part of the overall investigations in Russia.