http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/l...504-2izuh.html
Time for ASADA to come clean
Date
May 5, 2013
Phil Gould
League Columnist
It's now been almost three months since that infamous press conference in Canberra where it was declared Australian sport was riddled with the widespread use of performance-enhancing ElephantJuice, links to organised crime and match fixing.
In the days that followed, six NRL clubs were summoned to a meeting with the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority because they had been named in an Australian Crime Commission report associated with these very serious matters.
Since that time, five of these clubs have been exonerated of any wrong doing with regards to systematic doping. No individual or club has been charged with any offense relating to these matters. One player has been interviewed, and from all reports that discussion resulted in a frustrated investigation team walking from the room in protest at an alleged lack of co-operation.
What we have seen though, is a continual feed of hysteria, unfounded allegations and threats of serious punishment to individuals, churned out through the various media platforms. Every week there is a new story. We have frozen blood samples. We have phone taps. We have credit card receipts. We will instigate compulsory blood passports for all athletes. Get in quick to cut yourself a deal. Then there is the "dob-in-a-mate" option to reduce your own suspension. If you lie to the investigators you will end up in jail.
I have huge concerns over what appears to be a deliberate campaign to force some individual to come forward and incriminate either himself or others of these alleged offences.
In the early days following the press conference, what appeared to be investigators giving sound legal advice to players on their rights and responsibilities in this process, now seems to be part of a strategy to extract from players the information and evidence ASADA needs to lay charges against a club or individual.
You see, in my own uneducated and often sceptical mind, I have these questions about the whole messy affair. Why the ferocity and aggression of the initial press conference when it's now shown the vast majority of the allegations made at that time were merely speculation or exaggeration? Who benefited from that press conference? Why haven't these organised crime groups and match fixers been arrested and charged? If ASADA had the evidence to lay charges, why haven't they? If ASADA had the evidence to lay charges, why do they need to conduct this protracted interview process?
Am I being naive?
My biggest concern now is for the rights of the players who are about to be interviewed this week after having been subjected to months of what I see as deliberate inducement, if not intimidation, from those who have fuelled this persistent media barrage of threats and allegations.
Have our players' rights been protected?
In a lengthy discussion, I raised my concerns with Judge Paul Conlon, a man who has worked for the past thirty years in criminal law, 20 of those years as one of the state's leading Crown Prosecutors and the past seven years served as a Judge in the District Court.
Judge Conlon also serves on the NRL judiciary and has been instrumental in developing the game's judicial processes, with particular attention to the issue of fairness to the players with regards to prosecution, evidence and suspensions. He has been a tremendous asset to our game.
Over now to the Judge - who unlike myself, does have an educated mind and is well versed in dealing with fact, rather than getting carried away with emotion. However, he said he too had serious concerns about the process. He said he was happy to have the discussion as it was important that rights of individuals were not disregarded in the process.
When asked if he could detail some of those concerns, he said: "That was quite a performance in Canberra in early March. Everyone witnessing it could be forgiven for thinking that there was reliable and credible 'evidence' to support the sensational allegations labelled as the 'blackest day in sport' and that charges would follow based on that 'evidence'. The findings of the ACC were handed to ASADA and to date very little has happened.
''For those who have had years of experience in criminal law and dealing with crime commissions they would know that crime commissions do not call press conferences to talk about investigation findings prior to charges being laid. It is difficult to put a 'spin' on it to legitimise what took place. That is not to say there were not legitimate concerns, however, clearly there are better ways of addressing those concerns with the codes. The CEOs had to take on face value the validity of the allegations relating to their sport. David Smith and the NRL have acted in good faith and they continue to do so. However, I have real concerns over whether ASADA have so acted.
''One example of ASADA apparently not acting in good faith is that initially they addressed club officials, who were informed of the discounts for players who came forward to assist. Six NRL clubs were named. However, at a later stage it was acknowledged that in respect of five of those clubs there was no evidence of systemic doping. Why were they named in the first place? Damage to the reputation of those clubs would be considerable. Alarm bells should have been ringing at that point.''
PG: How important are the interviews in this process?
JPC: ''One thing is certain - you don't need to conduct interviews with players if you have 'evidence'. With the assistance of some sections of the media, it would seem that a campaign has been conducted, designed to intimidate and threaten players that, unless they come forward and tell ASADA what it wants to hear, their livelihoods will be destroyed. If the players have the right to a presumption of innocence, then it is for the other party to prove the guilt and that party should act with propriety. Look, perhaps my most important role as chairman of the NRL judiciary is to ensure that the players get a fair hearing. As a Judge presiding daily over criminal trials I am concerned to ensure that those charged receive a fair trial and that their basic rights are protected. However, I have paid close attention to the unfolding saga as it would appear they have little interest in a fair and just process and are demonstrating little regard for the rights of players. Indeed it seems their belief is that players have no rights.''
PG: Do the players have any notice of the allegations against them?
JPC: ''I am aware that the players' legal representatives have, quite reasonably, requested ASADA to provide particulars and details of allegations about which they want to interview players. Those requests have simply been rejected. Yet the NRL are requiring players to attend interviews in the absence of any knowledge of the allegations being made against them. I understand the NRL are doing that to assist the process. A recent newspaper article carried the headline, "Sports stars face a year in jail if they lie to ASADA" and quoted a section of the Commonwealth Criminal Code. It is highly questionable whether that would have any applicability to the interviewing of players by ASADA and, in any event, as the section involves a criminal sanction, surely the players would be entitled to a caution in respect of their right to silence. However, ASADA is of the view they have no right to silence. This is just another example of the intimidatory tactics being employed that may well lead to placing the players under duress. If the police in any state of Australia were to conduct the interview of suspected persons in this manner, our courts would rule the interview inadmissible. Under the NRL Anti Doping Code, players are required to provide 'reasonable assistance'. Sure, players should provide reasonable assistance, but this must be predicated on the assumption that those conducting this enquiry are behaving ethically and with propriety. On the evidence displayed in the public arena it would appear that has not been the case.''
PG: How can we get this matter resolved?
JPC: ''ASADA should be told to charge if they have evidence. The lives of people should not be the subject of a political game. Now, I understand difficult and important issues are involved, however, if there is no evidence, the government need to be so advised. Their legitimate concerns may then be able to be addressed by an inquiry where all parties are free to provide information without penalty. That would allow for the real problems, if they exist, to be addressed and for all sports to move forward with a new understanding. Of course, that will not happen if the only real interest at the moment is to claim a few 'scalps'.''
Like I said, I hope that our players' rights will be protected during this interview process.
Twitter-@gusgould91
