TWO global experts on anti-doping in sports expressed confidence in the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission’s (JADCo) overseeing of drug testing, cases of adverse analytical findings, and disciplinary hearings.

The issue arose during Saturday’s Anti-Doping in Sport Workshop at the Faculty of Law Lecture Theatre on the University of the West Indies, Mona campus, while lawyers demonstrated and raised doubt JADCO from Back page

over cases related to Jamaican athletes.

However, former science director of the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) Dr Richard Hilderbrand and the onetime boss of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Richard ‘Dick’ Pound declared satisfaction that the correct procedures is being followed in Jamaica.

Speaking to the Jamaica Observer, Dr Hilderbrand said though he is not fully familiar with all the cases, he has a “great deal” of faith in how anti-doping measures are managed across the globe. He suggested that a lack of mutual understanding on anti-doping matters could be the reason for misdirected criticism.

“I’m not familiar with the cases (in Jamaica) that much, but I can say I have a great deal of confidence in the certified laboratories and in the anti-doping organisations (around the world). I find that all of the people I deal with are very interested in the ethics and integrity,” he said at the end of the workshop.

“The attorneys that were speaking for the defence (of athletes)… (it is important) to have them understand the organisational structure of the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission and how tribunals work to make decisions and how the appeals work. Some of that explanation is going to be critical,” added Hilderbrand, who now consults on sport anti-doping science.

However, attorney-at-law Alando Terrelonge, who represented embattled sprinter Steve Mullings during the Jamaica Anti-Doping disciplinary hearings in 2011, targeted the JADCo and some of the guidelines set out by the WADA.

Pound, also a former International Olympic Committee (IOC) executive, and one who has in the past controversially questioned the effectiveness of JADCo’s programmes, was firm that proper guidelines were followed in the Mullings case.

“I’m not that familiar (with the details, but) the process went in the normal direction,” said the toughtalking Pound.

Mullings, who has maintained he is innocent, was banned for life by a Jamaica Anti-doping disciplinary panel after testing positive for the ultradiuretic Furosemide.

Terrelonge, while acknowledging the relevance of the local body, told the Observer in a telephone interview yesterday that he believes JADCo’s management of disciplinary hearings is questionable.

“I don’t really have a difficulty per se with JADCo because we do need a body that will police athletics in Jamaica and to ensure that those athletes who are not doping are protected from those athletes who do decide to dope. We need to ensure that fairness is applied in all measures of sports.

“What I do have a difficulty with is when persons refuse to give athletes, whom allegations are made against, the opportunity to have a fair hearing,” he said while challenging the integrity of the testing on Mullings’ A and B samples.

In the meantime, some critics have also highlighted that JADCo, which is funded by the government of Jamaica, is currently without an executive director.

Chairman of JADCo Dr Herbert Elliott defended the local body’s level of fairness, its independence and its carrying out of anti-doping programmes.

“We are obliged because of the standing of our athletes to do certain things, so we have to do those. We have World Cup football, the girls going off to play netball and we are going to Moscow (World Athletics Championship) this year. We have to do all those things to satisfy that our athletes are all clean.

“It (JADCo) is independent. The Jamaica Anti-Doping programme is divided into three things. JADCo does the testing… we have a commission that listens to cases (and) we have an appeal’s commission. These are totally separated from JADCo,” Dr Elliott said.

Terrelonge countered by suggesting there existed a blurring of the lines.

“Yes, JADCo will tell you that JADCo is separate from JADCo’s disciplinary arm, which is the disciplinary panel, which is also distinct from the appeals tribunal, but certainly there are those who have a difficulty with everybody falling under what is perceived to be the same umbrella even though they are distinct entities,” Terrelonge claimed.

The anti-doping workshop is aimed at raising the awareness of the science and laws surrounding drug testing in sports. It also seeks to promote mutual understanding between antidoping stakeholders from the developed and developing world.

Minister with responsibility for sport Natalie Neita-Headley, Jamaica Athletics Administrative Association president Warren Blake, Court of Arbitration for Sports expert Jeffrey Benz, Principal of the Norman Manley Law School Carol Aina, head of the Jamaica Olympic Association Michael Fennell, Racers Track Club head coach Glen Mills and chairperson of the Workshop Committee Dr Rachel Irving were among those in attendance.