Recent events relating to the forthcoming investigation of the UCI and it’s anti-doping procedures, have confirmed to CCN that the preparations are suffering inappropriate influence from the UCI itself which will prohibit any possibility of a fully independent review.
In a letter sent to the Review Commission yesterday, CCN has confirmed that the UCI’s power of veto on all amendments to a supposedly independent review, is completely unacceptable and that CCN will play no part in a process that continues to be singularly orchestrated by the organisation that is under investigation. Therefore, CCN will neither co-operate with, or endorse a toothless and wholly inappropriate process that is clearly not independent of UCI interference.
Upon the publication of the Commission’s terms of reference on November 30th, 2012, CCN immediately called for wider powers of investigation. These included the addition of a truth and reconciliation process and amnesty programme to guarantee protection for important witnesses. These demands are consistent with the positions of both WADA and USADA.
At a meeting in Colorado on December, 15th & 16th, amendments reflecting this position were officially requested by WADA and USADA. These were accepted by the Commission which surprisingly maintained that final approval from the UCI was required in order for the proposals to be adopted.
The UCI’s response took almost a month. On 11th January, 2013, the UCI informed the commission they were not willing to accept the inclusion of the additional proposals. Despite the protracted response time, the UCI also refused to extend the deadline for the commission’s final report – effectively reducing the time allotted to the overall review process.
Upon the creation of the Commission’s panel in November and the announcement of the original terms of reference, UCI President, Pat McQuaid stated that: “The UCI did not set the terms, the commission themselves set the terms of reference.” However, the requirement for any proposed amendments to be approved by the UCI, clearly impinges on claims of the Commission’s independence and questions the veracity of Mr McQuaid’s statement. It is clear that the Commission’s review is NOT independent of UCI influence.
At present, it is clear the Commission is being systematically prevented from conducting a truly independent review by inappropriate interference from the UCI. Therefore, CCN has confirmed it cannot co-operate in the review or public hearing until such time as the Commission obtains a position of full independence.
CCN calls on the Commission to unilaterally adopt principles that collective world agencies agree are vital for the successful conclusion of a comprehensive and unrestricted review.