How did it all start?
On German TV ARD at the end of 2014, a documentary was released on doping by Russian athletes. In particular, the tape used a video featuring Olympic champion Maria Savinova, telling how, with the help of the doping drug oxandrolone, she manages to quickly restore her strength. Also on the record there is a certain person (according to the journalist, the coach of the champion Vladimir Kazarin), who gives the athletes the drug oxandrolone. Although the video does not clearly show Savinova's face, and her confession is only a translation into German, the film caused a stir. World Anti-Doping Agency WADA announced an investigation into all cases of doping by Russian athletes mentioned in the film. In 2016, journalist Hajo Seppelt, the author of the tape, admitted that all the documentary facts of the picture are unreliable. The director's goal was to draw public attention to the use of doping drugs by athletes.
In early January, after the accusations WADA in doping fraud, the former head of the Moscow Anti-Doping Laboratory, Grigory Rodchenkov, moved to the United States for security reasons. And immediately after it became known about the death of the chairman of the executive council of RUSADA Vyacheslav Sinev, who headed the department from 2008 to 2010. 10 days later, the former executive director of the Russian Anti-Doping Agency, Nikita Kamaev, died.
In May 2016, The New York Times published a statement by Rodchenkov. According to him, two weeks before the start of the Olympic Games in Sochi in 2014, the Russian Ministry of Sports approved the list of athletes included in the doping program. After that, laboratory staff, with the participation of special services, replaced one hundred positive tests. Rodchenkov presented as evidence The New York Times emails from the Ministry of Sports. Vitaly Mutko rated this post The New York Times as "a continuation of the information attack on Russian sports."
wada, The World Anti-Doping Agency, on July 18, presented a report on the results of an investigation into the substitution of doping tests of Russian athletes at the Sochi Olympics.It follows from the report that the Ministry of Sports, together with the anti-doping laboratories in Moscow and Sochi, as well as with the assistance of the FSB, participated in fraud with the results of the analyzes of Russian athletes. Head of the Independent Commission WADA Richard McLaren stressed that Russian Sports Minister Vitaly Mutko was aware of the substitution of dirty doping samples for clean ones.
How were doping tests substituted in Sochi?
At the Olympic Games in 2014, additional doping control was carried out by foreign countries. In order to commit fraud with the analyzes of athletes, the FSB decided to replace positive doping tests, for which a special technique was invented to open sealed samples.
The autopsy method was demonstrated to the experts of an independent commission. During the investigation, samples from the Moscow and Sochi laboratories were checked, traces of autopsy were found on them. It also turned out that the DNA of the winner Olympic competitions does not match the DNA of her sample.
Replacement of positive doping tests with negative ones was carried out when there were no traces of doping in the urine of athletes. From the center sports training teams where the samples were stored, the FSB took the urine and delivered it to Sochi.
According to Rodchenkov, every day he received from the Ministry of Sports a list of athletes whose tests he had to replace. After that, at night, in the laboratory, Russian anti-doping experts and representatives of the special services changed dirty doping tests for clean ones. Test tubes opened using the FSB technology were passed through a hole in the wall, the size of a fist.
In addition, Rodchenkov admitted that he developed a doping "cocktail" consisting of three illegal drugs (methenolone, trenbolone and oxandrolone) and alcohol (whiskey or martini). This mixture was called "Duchess". Russian athletes rinsed her mouth with her. Such doping was used by at least 15 Russian medalists.
What threatens the WADA report?
Recall that in November 2015, following the results of the investigationindependent commission of WADA under the leadership of Dick Pound, the Russian national team in athletics already suspended from participation in the Olympics in Rio. In this context, the report WADA may result in the exclusion of athletes and other sports from the Olympic Games.
The head of the independent commission, Richard McLaren, clarified that WADA there is no authority not to recommend a country for participation in the Olympics. However Ben Nichols, a spokesman for the commission, announced "that the Anti-Doping Agency is calling on the international sports community to ban Russian athletes from participating in international competitions, including and Olympic Games 2016 in Brazil. This ban, according to WADA, should be in effect until the “culture change”, ”RBC reports.
The final decision on the participation of the Russian team in the Rio Olympics can be made by the International Olympic Committee (IOC). The head of the committee, Thomas Bach, announced his intention to take the toughest sanctions against individuals and organizations engaged in doping fraud.
A number of countries also oppose Russia's participation in the Olympics. Among them are Austria, Canada, USA, Spain, Germany, Switzerland and Japan.
How do people in Russia react to the results of the investigation?
In a statement posted on the Kremlin website, Vladimir Putin asked WADA to provide “more complete, objective, fact-based information to be taken into account in the investigation by Russian law enforcement and investigative agencies.”
Putin also promised to remove the direct perpetrators of the forgery until the end of the investigation. According to the investigation wada, direct and participants in the falsification of samples are Adviser to the Minister of Sports Natalya Zhelanova, Head of the Department of Medical and Research Programs of the Russian Olympic Committee Irina Rodionova, employee of the Russian Sports Training Center (CSP) Alexei Velikodny, Deputy Director of the Department of Science and Education of the Ministry of Sports Avak Abalyan. Although, according to Richard McLaren, Russian Sports Minister Vitaly Mutko was aware of all the machinations, there is no question of his resignation. Presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov explained that "Mutko is not mentioned in the report as a direct perpetrator,"
Amendments to the anti-doping legislation are planned to apply not only to coaches, but also to instructors, doctors and other personnel interacting with the athlete. Each of them will be able to be suspended from work if the fact of manipulation with a prohibited drug is established even outside the competitive period. Such norms are contained in the draft law submitted for consideration by the State Duma, the second reading of which is already scheduled for early December. At the same time, the deputies will consider an initiative to create an industry certification system sports coaches. The Ministry of Sports told Izvestia that they support both innovations. Experts believe that in order to solve the problem, first of all, effective law enforcement and “anti-doping education” are required.
The State Duma is preparing for the second reading two draft amendments to amend the law “On physical culture and sports in Russian Federation". Both were introduced in September 2017 by deputies from the LDPR, and later supported by the relevant committee, parliamentarians from other factions and the Ministry of Sports. At the same time, the authors of the documents were recommended to finalize them. The amendments are already ready, and in December the drafts are planned to be considered at a meeting of the chamber.
The initiative to suspend coaches for violating Russian and international anti-doping rules implies three reasons for such a decision. The first is if a mentor finds a prohibited drug or proves that he distributed it (both during and outside the competition). The second is an attempt to falsify control samples, and the third is if “facts of intentional complicity” in doping by an athlete are established.
In November, the government introduced its additions to the bill, proposing to expand the Labor Code with a similar norm. Also, amendments (Izvestia has them) were prepared by one of the authors of the project, Dmitry Svishchev (LDPR) and Valery Gazzaev (Fair Russia). The deputies proposed to include in the list of those who fall under the law, “other specialists in the field of physical culture and sports." As practice shows, anti-doping rules are often violated by instructors, sports medicine specialists or other athlete personnel, MPs said.
The second bill is aimed at creating a system for attesting coaches, including Russian national teams. There are three categories: second, first and highest. The criteria for certification will be approved by the Ministry of Sports. The decision on awarding a certificate will be made by regional executive authorities and all-Russian sports federations.
The adoption of the proposed norms will make it possible to move forward along the path of increasing the level of professional skills of coaches, the effectiveness of their activities, and also, importantly, to attract young personnel to the industry, - Deputy Dmitry Svishchev, one of the authors of the project, emphasized in a conversation with Izvestia.
He said that for the second reading of the bill, a number of additions to it, together with parliamentarians and the professional community, were prepared by the Ministry of Sports. Thus, it is proposed to certify not only coaches, but also other industry specialists. The Ministry of Sports of the Russian Federation should subsequently approve their list, as well as qualification requirements and the procedure for assigning categories. The assignment of the lowest - the second - category can be entrusted to local governments. In addition, the possibility of introducing an additional qualification category is being discussed.
The deputy stressed that both bills are aimed at improving Russian sports legislation and bringing it into line with world practice.
The Ministry of Sports supports both projects and is interested in their adoption, Natalya Parshikova, deputy head of the department, told Izvestia.
The bills are very important and relevant. The initiative to certify coaches is in line with the instructions of the president and will allow the industry to develop. The anti-doping rule is also overdue and will improve anti-doping measures in accordance with the plan developed by the independent public anti-doping commission, the Deputy Minister explained.
The problem of doping cannot be solved only by changing the law - this is a matter of law enforcement, says Anatoly Peskov, a lecturer at the Russian International Olympic University and a member of the board of directors of the International Sports Law Association. We need to put things in order first of all sports clubs and federations, to apply existing norms and "implant" a complete rejection of doping, the expert believes.
— Russian s the athletes lost the opportunity to compete at the Olympics in Rio de Janeiro based on the report of Richard McLaren. This report, as it now notes WADA, does not meet many criteria and cannot be the basis for a number of accusations ...
- If you remember, in the case of Rio, the issue of eligibility was referred to various international federations - on the basis that they probably know better the doping status of the athletes. The IOC received recommendations, and a commission of three members of the executive board unanimously made a decision, but based on the relevant conclusions.
- Why was the principle of collective responsibility applied to Russia, which was not considered in relation to other countries whose athletes were accused of doping?
“With the same amount of evidence that we have for Russia, this principle would be applied to other countries as well. In the case of Russia, the situation is as if the driver on the freeway was stopped for speeding, and he said to the policeman: “Why did you detain me? There are a lot of people going faster than me!” The answer is: “Perhaps. And someday we'll catch them too. But now you've been caught."
What is being done to catch them? We hear only arguments about "what to do to stop Russia", that Russia is to blame. In all this, if you like, the “prosecution of violators” is now being conducted only in relation to Russia. It feels like no one else is exposed to it.
Russia is now in the spotlight. Trying in the media to present everything as if this problem is not in Russia, but in the IOC or WADA, is fundamentally wrong. Russia has a problem with doping. At least there was a general ban on athletes, and given the situation, I think that's right. I also agree with the similar decision of the International Paralympic Committee (IPC).
Many federations have been hopelessly compromised by relations with Russia. For example, it was important for senior officials of the International Association of Athletics Federations to hold many events and championships on the territory of Russia - that is, the assessment of athletes was uneven.
It seems to me that they coped very well with this in rowing, but has at least one judoka been banned? Can you guess why? Who is the Honorary President of the International Judo Federation?
Do you think there are deeper problems with the federations themselves? I wanted to point out that international union biathletes ( IBU) called the McLaren report controversial and closed 22 of the 29 open cases. As a result, sports federations make such statements, while the McLaren report refers to a thousand athletes, but confirmation has not appeared. Do you think federations are just trying to hush up doping scandals in their sports?
- From experience I can say that the international federations as a group approach the identification of positive doping tests without enthusiasm. But now WADA has received a database, access to which McLaren, according to him, was not provided. The agency is studying it and, I believe, sees that everything is exactly as McLaren said, it is only necessary to get evidence. You can find data on doping tests that testify against you - tests that were positive, but then appeared as negative. And this is possible only if there is a well-established scheme.
— Head of Compliance CommitteeWADAJonathan Taylor said that RUSADA cannot be reinstated without recognizing the McLaren report.
- The Russian Anti-Doping Agency accepted almost everything that was said in the McLaren report, but does not agree with the accusations that some kind of doping program was carried out with state support. There is no evidence for this, but for RUSADA there is vicious circle. Is the agency expected to plead guilty to something for which there is no concrete evidence?
- The road map was discussed with the Russian Anti-Doping Agency, and it agreed to it. Agreed to give access to this database and samples held because a criminal investigation is ongoing. Agreed to take responsibility for the system of state support for the use of doping and provide access to closed cities. Those were the agreements.
But there is such a principle as the burden of proof— the rule of distribution between the participants in the process of the obligation to substantiate the existence of certain circumstances that are essential for resolving the case.
— Ready to repeat: those were the agreements. But they do not want to recognize the existence of a system of state support for the use of doping. They agreed to this, and now they are trying to back down.
- Testimony of informants - Grigory Rodchenkov and those who still remain anonymous are cited as evidence. But it is not customary to consider such information in court. Why then did they make an exception in this case?
“That's perfectly acceptable when the physical safety of witnesses is at stake. Many courts provide for this possibility.
— Rodchenkov said he was coerced into participating in a state-supported doping program. But it should be noted that participation in the activities of RUSADA and doping schemes brought him a lot of money. Why do you think he didn't make his revealing statements sooner?
- In the period before the Olympic Games in Sochi, Rodchenkov was part of the system. Then, after the publication of the report of the commission headed by me, he lost his post as head of the Moscow anti-doping laboratory. Subsequently, he became aware of the death of first one, and then - less than two weeks later - the second of his predecessor in this position. Suspecting that things were not going well for him, he decided to leave the country.
As for his revealing statements, I got acquainted with Grigory's testimony as part of the investigation of our commission. It follows from them that he was part of the system and was in no hurry to shed light on the violations being committed - and this is not surprising ... He knew perfectly well about the violations.
There were two other informants. They occupied low positions and were very well trained, and their words were in many respects trustworthy, as well as Rodchenkov's testimony. However, McLaren did not take his words at face value - all information emanating from him was compared with the testimony of other witnesses, information from documents and other sources, and only then was regarded as reliable.
- Rodchenkov's testimony formed the basis of the McLaren report and statements about the existence in Russia of a state system to support doping in sports ...
- Testimony and documents.
- But, in addition, it is alleged that the FSB officers opened containers with doping tests and replaced their contents. Berlinger - their manufacturer - said that it was impossible to open them without leaving physical traces of the opening.
The company is absolutely right. Physical traces have been found. When examining containers that were opened in order to replace their contents, scratches were found. If you know what you are looking for, it is very easy to spot them. There could be only one reason for the appearance of such traces: they were opened. Why would they open up?
- Returning to the Olympics in Sochi: it was attended by 20 international observers who monitored doping tests. Why didn't any of them pay attention to it? After all, that was their job, wasn't it?
The change took place late at night. Through part of the FSB-controlled laboratory, to which no one else had access. Through a hole in the wall. The director of the anti-doping laboratory from Montreal (or from Rome, or wherever) was not in the building at that time. There is nothing surprising in this - the duties of the director of the laboratory do not include catching FSB officers, who, moreover, are there under the guise of repair personnel.
- If what you say really happened, it turns out that the laboratory made a serious omission in ensuring the safe storage of doping samples.
- Yes. And the problem is that this omission was deliberate. That's the problem.
- You are a representative of the International Olympic Committee. It must be admitted that the McLaren report raises certain questions. Is it in the spirit of the Olympics that such large-scale suspensions are based on a report that many sports bodies say is flawed?
- Decisions to suspend athletes were made by the IOC Disciplinary Commission under the leadership of Denis Oswald on the basis of specific and sufficient evidence. Sports arbitration court upheld these decisions. It's not about any persecution, it's more about following the rules. If you break the rules, you will be punished.
You stressed that the decision was not politically motivated. Nevertheless, one gets the impression that the decisions made in sports are largely political in nature. What do you say to that?
I don't think so, at least in this case. In sports there is a place for geopolitical and political considerations, the desire for equality between continents and gender balance. All this is taken into account when choosing venues. sports events. But this does not hide the lobbying of the interests of this or that capital. It's not that some countries have privileges and others don't.
- You have been in sports for a long time, you know how everything is arranged in administrative terms. It is difficult to remember when such close attention was previously focused exclusively on Russia in connection with doping. Despite another scandal in Kenya and claims that many British cyclists suffer from asthma, these athletes receive much less attention than Russian ones. Why?
“We have clear evidence of government-supported fraud. It is unacceptable.
- Despite the fact that the McLaren report raises questions, and there is no strong evidence, you still claim that doping is supported at the state level in Russia.
- Yes. In my opinion, there was a lot of evidence for this, but not enough for McLaren to have reason to blame specific athletes, but he did not. He noted: "I have no such information, but there are records indicating that they were on the list of protected athletes." McLaren did not draw any conclusions about which he would have any reasonable doubt, which is one of the standards of proof in criminal proceedings.
Thus, I believe that the McLaren report was mishandled: the IOC members, instead of taking note of this information and saying: “Thank you for shedding light on all these violations”, brushed aside the report and called the McLaren conclusions “statements”. This is rather disrespectful to an extremely experienced arbitrator who has repeatedly conducted investigations.
I don't understand what kind of chart this is.
Okay, I should probably reveal.
Here we have a diagram, presumably it shows what proportion of various phenomena is occupied by certain substances in the sample population, where alcohol is in the lead in an explicit form.
Thus, for the average observer, who especially supports liberal views on legalization, the result on the diagram is almost a “banner” with which he is ready to defend his positions. Indeed, in response to the statement that “drugs are a crime”, you can always say “look, how much crime is from alcohol, and how much is from marijuana! this is a serious study, here, an institute! ”, Done.
Now what I don't understand.
For the list of substances and phenomena, I do not know the general population of the sample, so I do not understand what these numbers mean: 5, 70, 80, are these pieces or%?
Then I don't know the relevance of the sample, who was counted?
Let's say we can imagine a social group "potential substance users", which, for example, include everyone from 21 years of age and older, because by law they can consume alcohol, or from 14 years of age, because usually this is the "dangerous" age at which illegal use begins, or all women and children are included, from infants to very old people, and is social status taken into account, i.e. are there schoolchildren and students, and housewives, and bank employees, and the homeless? And in what district, city, region was the study carried out, what sector of the economy is developed there? So the study suggests the presence of homeless infants who use cocaine?
As a result, without understanding the quantitative and qualitative indicators, it is impossible to imagine the representativeness of this study.
The subject of research is substances that are also not clear, let's say alcohol, there is like beer in a bar, where after the 5th mug someone breaks a chair on someone's head, and then goes for 15 days, and there is 20-year-old cognac, which they drink alone sitting in front of the fireplace and do not commit any crimes, is such a generalization acceptable?!
And if you still turn to the diagram, then without regard to the quality of the data, even it contains the answer to the question “do drugs really lead to adverse events”, yes! Is it true that alcohol and cigarettes lead to adverse events more often than "drugs", NO! Just add the result for alcohol and nicotine into one group, and for drugs into another, and you will see that this is a decent difference, while you will see how many "users" give rise to those phenomena, and you will see that among a small number of drug users there are a large number of phenomena, and among a large number of blueberry users in % ratio of phenomena less. Thus, the number of problems with an increase in the number of drug users will grow exponentially and anti-drug legislation is working to prevent, even if only slightly, these indicators from growing, at the same time leaving alcohol and tobacco to society as an affordable alternative, regulating it with excise taxes.
