What the CAS Decision on Claudia Pechstein Means for Go
Robert Jasiek
sprinterin Claudia Pechstein to be guilty of doping by means of
circumstancial evidence (too high values of retikulocytes, i.e. young
red blood particles said to be related to EPO, in her blood) only.
This is CAS's first such judgement. Since CAS has its seat in
Lausanne, Switzerland, next Pechstein will appeal to the Swiss
bundesgericht (federal court of Switzerland).
For comparison, the IGF Anti-Doping Regulations say:
�4.2: "[...] The standard of proof in all cases is greater than a mere
balance of probability but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
[...]"
$15.2: "[...] these Anti-Doping Regulations shall be interpreted as an
independent and autonomous text and not by reference to existing law
[...]"
The IGF has its seat in Tokyo, Japan.
CAS has violated and the IGF Anti-Doping Regulations do violate the
principle in dubio pro reo. If CAS and IGF were in Germany, things
would be very obvious: This principle is guaranteed explicitly by "Im
Zweifel f�r den Angeklagten". However, we need to consider other
countries. Which? Switzerland because of CAS or Japan because of the
IGF? Already this is very non-obvious. Does anybody know the answer
for sure? So it might be either Switzerland or Japan. Does either
country have the in dubio pro reo principle in their laws? This is the
core of the matter since the Anti-Doping Regulations are already
pleased with some probability of guilt somewhere between 50% and
99.9999%. If the CAS seat should be relevant, then further appeal to
the European Human Rights Court in Stra�burg would be an option but
prospects are unclear because the European Human Rights Convention or
the UN Human Rights Declaration do not contain a clear statement of
the principle.
The only way of avoiding innocent players from being judged guilty of
doping is to change the IGF Anti-Doping Regulations, �4.2 in time,
i.e. before it is too late when some go player will be called guilty
on the grounds of circumstancial evidence only. The regulations do not
change themselves by themselves - it requires the IGF member countries
to be active at the IGF Annual General Meeting! Protect your players
from political judgements!
For me, Pechstein remains innocent until her guilt is proven beyond
doubt. In her case, this would include a proof that NO human being's
genes could possibly explain exceptionally high values of
retikulocytes. We all know that genes differ. Any court must take this
into account.
�15.2 of the IGF Anti-Doping Regulations is illegal, of course,
because it is saying to ignore all regular laws. As Pechstein's appeal
to the Swiss bundesgericht shows, CAS is not the highest instance of a
sports dispute. Of course not. Every sports organization is bound by
regular law. Therefore the IGF member countries should also achieve
cancellation of this unlawful paragraph!
In fact, the entire IGF Anti-Doping Regulations ought to be rewritten
since verbal treatments and statements override them anyway. As long
as they are verbal only, it will be tough though to prove their
existence before CAS or then regular courts. The only way to protect
go players is to act. Dear IGF member countries, do not cause bad
judgements on players and do not comment afterwards that they would
serve anti-doping ethics! They do not. All they do is to create wrong
judgements about an unknown percentage of innocent players. By leaving
the regulations unchanged, you share responsibility for that!
parim-nos...@gmx.de
> For me, Pechstein remains innocent until her guilt is proven beyond
> doubt. In her case, this would include a proof that NO human being's
> genes could possibly explain exceptionally high values of
> retikulocytes. We all know that genes differ. Any court must take this
> into account.
Hallo,
if this were the case, she would ALWAYS have exceptionally high values
of reticulocytes. According to the German newspaper I'm just reading,
however, she never had abnormal values until Nov. 17, 2007, when she had
3.75%. Normal values are around 2%. Extremely high values were then
measured during the 2009 World Championship: 3.49%, 3.54% and 3.38%.
Just 11 days later, she had an abnormally low value of 1.37%. Fishy.
Actually, I have a few questions about a much more fundamental issue.
Are we sure that we want doping controls in Go tournaments? Antidoping
rules might be a good idea for professionals and top-flight amateurs
chasing big money prizes, although I have serious doubts about it, if
this is the price to pay for getting into the National Olympic
Committes, the key to State and sponsors' money in several countries.
But antidoping rules are certainly not appropriate for the average amateur.
Many go players are not young athletes any more, if they ever were, and
quite a few not so young players need medicines on a daily basis for a
variety of reasons: headaches, stomach disorders, diabetes, high blood
pressure or more serious ailments. Are we supposed to check out and make
sure that those medicines do not contain any forbidden substance? Who is
supposed to pay for the necessary medical staff? Should we have to abide
by the stringent rules about telling our whereabouts several months in
advance to the antidoping controllers if we want to enter a tournament?
Does anybody know if 4 cups of strong coffee or 3 pints of beer are
enough to test positive?
At present I feel that the IGF should establish a separate organisation
for potential member of the National Olympic Committes, who will have to
abide by the Olympic rules, while letting the amateurs be amateurs. As
far as I am concerned, I am not going to enter a tournament requiring
antidoping controls at my level (1 kyu, not even a dan player). I really
have no idea if I could test positive for one of the reasons stated
above or for other unknown reason and I would not like being blamed as a
doper for failing a test, as I know for sure that I am not doping
consciously to get 3 wins out of 5 tournament games instead of my
average 2 wins.
Best regards,
Sergio Parimbelli
Robert Jasiek
>if this were the case, she would ALWAYS have exceptionally high values
>of reticulocytes.
Why? Other blood particles have varying numbers, too. That a constant
number of reticulocytes is the norm for most human beings does not
necessarily mean that other human beings could not live.
>According to the German newspaper I'm just reading,
>however, she never had abnormal values until Nov. 17, 2007, when she had
>3.75%. Normal values are around 2%. Extremely high values were then
>measured during the 2009 World Championship: 3.49%, 3.54% and 3.38%.
>Just 11 days later, she had an abnormally low value of 1.37%. Fishy.
Suspicious for sure. It does not prove it though. Rather it proves
that a human being can live well with varying and pretty different
concentrations like 1.37% versus 3.75%.
>Are we sure that we want doping controls in Go tournaments?
There appear to be three opinions:
1) No.
2) Yes, but only because of the money.
3) Yes, it does make sense in itself.
From what I have heard, frequency of opinions decreases in this order.
>But antidoping rules are certainly not appropriate for the average amateur.
Especially not the current regulations with its dozens of pages, of
which quite some are overridden by hardly documented verbal agreements
and statements so that it is pretty unclear even what the rules are.
>Are we supposed to check out and make
>sure that those medicines do not contain any forbidden substance?
Yes.
>Who is supposed to pay for the necessary medical staff?
The players themselves.
No, I don't like that but so it is supposed to be.
>Should we have to abide
>by the stringent rules about telling our whereabouts several months in
>advance to the antidoping controllers if we want to enter a tournament?
Due to my activity, currently this is not necessary for Go players. It
is documented verbally only though. So we constantly need to observe
the go politicians if they continue to maintain their promises.
>Does anybody know if 4 cups of strong coffee
Currently coffee is allowed for Go players.
>or 3 pints of beer are enough to test positive?
I do not know about alcoholics. Was it related to anti-doping or is it
a tournament-rules matter of not being drunken? I would have to look
it up.
>I am not going to enter a tournament requiring
>antidoping controls at my level (1 kyu, not even a dan player).
Currently only four tournaments will be controlled: WMSG, WAGC, Asian
Games, KPMC. So practically speaking, you might wish to avoid your
KPMC qualification. Well, in some years. E.g., this years it was
changed in the last minute and we learnt during the opening ceremony
of the German qualification tournament that the winner would not have
to sign anything about anti-doping because the KPMC was to drop its
doping-testing.
Planar
documents they mention, and I have a few remarks.
1. These regulations list a whole lot of unreadable substance names that
I've never seen before, and I'm now responsible for making sure none
of them ever enter my blood stream? And that list is not even
exhaustive!
2. Cannabinoids are prohibited. When some of the best players in
Europe are from the Netherlands where their use is (as far as I know)
legal? Do we want to exclude them from our tournaments?
3. In-competition use of alcohol is prohibited for a (small) number of
sports, including Boules. This is absurd! It's against the spirit of
boules to play it without drinking pastis.
There is some hope for us low-level amateurs in the following sentences,
found in the definition of "Athlete", in appendix 1:
Some National Anti-Doping Organizations may elect to test and apply
anti-doping rules to recreational-level or masters competitors who are
not current or potential national calibre competitors. National
Anti-Doping Organizations are not required, however, to apply all
aspects of the Code to such Persons.
--
Planar
remove .invalid from my address to send me mail
"Surprise. Then just use AGA rules and that's it." - Robert Jasiek
Robert Jasiek
<damien....@inria.fr.invalid> wrote:
>There is some hope for us low-level amateurs in the following sentences,
>found in the definition of "Athlete", in appendix 1:
>
> Some National Anti-Doping Organizations may elect to test and apply
> anti-doping rules to recreational-level or masters competitors who are
> not current or potential national calibre competitors. National
> Anti-Doping Organizations are not required, however, to apply all
> aspects of the Code to such Persons.
If we believe Martin Stiassny's statement, then as a consequence this
is one of the many written rules that is overwritten by verbal rules /
statements / gentlemen agreements. The relations between national go
associations and NADAs vary from country to country. So some NADAs
might be more active than others. Then we will have to see if all
NADAs would be well-informed about the go-internal verbal statements
and the IGF-WADA gentlemen agreement.
Strange and unexpected things might happen...
richard
> I've taken a look at the IGF anti-doping regulations and some of the
> documents they mention, and I have a few remarks.
>
> 1. These regulations list a whole lot of unreadable substance names that
> I've never seen before, and I'm now responsible for making sure none
> of them ever enter my blood stream? And that list is not even
> exhaustive!
>
> 2. Cannabinoids are prohibited. When some of the best players in
> Europe are from the Netherlands where their use is (as far as I know)
> legal? Do we want to exclude them from our tournaments?
>
Yes - if that's the reason they play so well :-)
I'm sure that I used to play more thoughtfully after smoking some resin
even if sometimes one might be unsure whose turn it was to play.
The worst of it seems to be that Cannabinoids remain detectable for a long time.
Also, what if you could become exposed by walking past a coffee shop.
Robert Jasiek
federal court (Bundesgericht, highest Swiss court) in Lausanne has
just allowed Pechstein to attend the ice sprinting world cup in Salt
Lake City, which is Pechstein's last (and only?) chance to qualify for
the olympics. The decision is only of procedural nature and not a
decision about the supposed anti-doping violation and penalty sentence
by CAS (yet).
Sources:
http://www.morgenpost.de/sport/berlin-sport/article1220105/Pechstein-darf-nun-doch-beim-Weltcup-starten.html
http://www.focus.de/sport/wintersport/eisschnelllauf-pechstein-stellt-eilantrag-fuer-weltcup-start_aid_461084.html
and other online newspapers.