Exclusive Interview with WADA President John Fahey

(ATR) World Anti-Doping Agency president John Fahey talks to Around the Rings from the sidelines of the WADA media symposium in Lausanne. He discusses anti-doping efforts at the London Olympics, reacts to the decision from U.S. governmental authorities to drop their investigation of Lance Armstrong and more in this exclusive interview.

Around the Rings: You had the media symposium Tuesday. How did that go? What did you talk about?

John Fahey: Both myself and David gave a statement, then we opened it up for questions and answers. I can say that a lot of the questions centered around Contador, the decision of [Monday]. Questions also came with the BOA and the case that they’ve got going with the case of non-compliance that they’ve got going with WADA and as you know CAS will hear.

The rest I think were, what will happen in London, so it was nothing too big, too controversial.

We’ve been doing interviews effectively since 11:30 this morning.

ATR: Do you have any comment on U.S. prosecutors’ decision to drop their case against Lance Armstrong?

JF: It’s hard to comment on that because no reasons were given.

I can say I’m surprised. As far as I was aware there was ongoing investigation, there were witnesses that had been scheduled for further examination after the decision was taken after the United States Attorney.

But the fact is that the Attorney does not have to give a reason for the decision under United States law and we have to recognize that those investigations related to alleged fraud, that is the United States criminal code, not anti-doping code, the fact that they’ve taken that decision is not something that I can’t explain. But I can say this: during that investigation substantial information was collected and collated with respect to anti-doping in sport and that information should be passed on now to the United States Anti-Doping Agency.

I see no reason it can’t be passed on because there is no prospect of that decision on there being any further legal proceedings taken under the United States criminal code. It might well be that that information can be used by USADA to take further action in respect to other athletes. They should certainly be given the opportunity to be examining that and there’s nothing I can find that there is a reason for the United States justice system to withhold passing on that information.

ATR: What does the anti-doping landscape look like for London? What does the situation look like especially in light of the BOA’s ongoing case on testing and results.

JF: Well look, that matter is before the court and unlike the applicant I will not comment, I won’t and never do. And it’s fair to say those rules should apply in this case. So I can’t comment on the merits of the case.

It’s regrettable that this continues to occupy the media space in this period when I think all of us that love sport would prefer to see the athletes covered more than the controversy on the rules of WADA.

Overall though, there’s no reason for us to believe the program that the IOC is putting together will be other than a most comprehensive program. In that regard we have been giving the assistance we always give to the IOC for them to carry out their anti-doping program during their event. They will announce the nature of their program at a time of their choosing but everything indicates it will be comprehensive in the lead up to the Games before athletes step foot in the Olympic Village and from that point on right through competition.

The other aspect that encourages me greatly, is the number of countries that are increasing undergoing a thorough evaluation of all their athletes that have been selected, prior to them going to another country. That indicates that a lot of athletes who might have got as far as London, are not going to be on the plane because they’ve been caught in their own countries. That happened before Beijing. That happened before Vancouver. And I’msure it will happen again.

Will there be totally clean Games? I think human nature suggests some fool will try, some cheats will be there that is simply human nature. We are even better than we were in Beijing. Keep in mind that the first effective WADA anti-doping program was Athens 2004 so this is really only our third Games.

We’ve got better information that applies to United Kingdom Anti-Doping, they’re a very efficient and effective unit, and they’ve been established under their own protocol and as an independent body in the last couple years.

The knowledge I have of them and their personnel gives me great comfort in them and they will as the front line body for catching any cheats, testing any cheats, that they will do it well.

Nothing will be wanting in the context of capacity to analyze samples that are taken leading up to and through the Games.

ATR: Does any intelligence you’ve gathered show there will be new substances, new techniques for doping in London?

JF: Let me put it to you this way—if we had that intelligence we wouldn’t disclose it.

But let me extend it a little further—we’re constantly undergoing research, working with pharmaceutical companies et cetera to be up-to-speed with any new drugs that might be available that might have a performance-enhancing property.

When we know about these new drugs we never publically disclose it. We simply use the knowledge to catch cheats. And so it’s in that context I’m unable to give you any specifics, other than to say that this is an aspect of our operations that is given considerable attention and has been of benefit to us in the past, and I’m sure will give benefit to work through the anti-doping movements, in and around London.

ATR: What can you say about plans for the next World Congress?

JF: We’ve just started the review process on the consultation of the Code. We invite anybody to put a submission up where they believe that the Code needs some changing where they think they can make it more effective to catch cheats or make it more effective in the context of sanctions or anything else. We really don’t restrict what we are prepared to listen to.

There will be a number of rounds of consultation with the submissions that come forward and working papers and whatnot before ultimately those changes are brought before us in Johannesburg of November next year.

So the process started with letters of invitation sent out before Christmas and we are just starting to see submissions coming forward. Europe for example has established a number of committees through the European Union and Commission, a number of countries are combining in that context. So a number of countries are combining in that context and individual countries and individual sports will likely come together in that way.

Will there be significant change? Well that’s a bit hard to say at this stage. I think the important thing is to invite everybody and get a Code that they’re comfortable with that will be effective or more effective than the current iteration. I have no feel for the sort of things that are [coming in] because the submissions have started flowing in at this stage.

ATR: This is the last 18 months of your term as well.

JF: Well, I’ve got 22 months left, it concludes the 31st of December next year. My successor will be the nominee of the sports movement and I have no idea who that might be at this stage.

Interviewed by Ed Hula.

20 Years at #1: