Press release: UCI responds to USADA shifting deadline on reasoned decision and case file
The UCI wonders why it is taking USADA so long to provide its reasoned decision and case file.
Reports state that its decision has been delayed because it is continuing to gather evidence and that it has yet to complete its case file.
“The UCI had no reason to assume that a full case file did not exist but USADA’s continued failure to produce the decision is now a cause for concern,” said Mr McQuaid, UCI President.
“It is over a month since USADA sanctioned Lance Armstrong. We thought that USADA were better prepared before initiating these proceedings” said Mr McQuaid.
It seems that it would have been more useful for USADA to have used the time of the Tour de France, the Olympic Games and the Road World Championships to prepare their case in full rather than to make announcements.
It is at very least unusual that USADA would still be gathering evidence against a person after it has found that person guilty.
The UCI assumes that the reasons for any difficulty in putting the evidence together will be explained in USADA’s decision.
The UCI has requested USADA to provide its decision and case file and has learnt of the reported delays through the media and not by any official communication from USADA. The sooner UCI receives the decision and case file the sooner UCI can provide its response.
Adopted by the Congress of the UCI, in its meeting of 21 September 2012 in Maastricht, the Netherlands
Considering that :
The case of former rider Lance Armstrong, whatever its outcome may be, invites to reflect on the effectiveness of the fight against doping, as is confirmed by the creation by WADA of a working group to that effect;
The UCI has always, as was already confirmed in 2002 in the Festina case by the Court of appeals of Douai (France), used all available means and made all reasonable efforts to fight doping in sport ;
The UCI has invested in the research for a method to detect EPO since the nineties, was the first sports federation to introduce a no-start ruled based upon the haematocrit level (1997), to introduce the urinary EPO test (2001) and to introduce the homologous blood transfusion test (2004);
The UCI was the first sports federation to introduce the athlete blood passport (2008), the most effective tool to prevent and detect blood doping ;
This testing programme of the UCI which was conducted independently, objectively and without consideration of any individuals has found many riders positive, including high profile riders ;
The comprehensive anti-doping programme of the UCI expresses both UCI’s awareness of the doping problem and its firm determination to do away with it ;
Yet various doping scandals have shown that athletes with the help of medical and other experts have managed to escape detection by the most effective doping programme ever implemented;
Notwithstanding all efforts it has not been possible to avoid doping practices for which science and WADA could not provide detection methods and that can only be detected by police methods that are outside the reach of an international federation ;
Awareness of what has happened or even sanctions for violations that have been detected many years afterwards do not enable to undo and clean up what has to be accepted as a dark period in cyclings history ;
There is no point in continuing to reexamine the past of then undetectable doping and stigmatize the sport of the young generations now that the situation has considerably improved through UCI’s continued efforts.
The Congress of the UCI confirms its confidence in the management of the UCI in its fight against doping over the years ; asks the Management Committee of the UCI :
to deal with the ongoing cases according to the applicable rules ;
to ignore attempts to exploit commercially or otherwise the painful aspects of cycling’s past ;
to concentrate on the anti-doping effort for the future of cycling in order to provide a clean environment for the next generations of riders.