ASADA wants access to mountain of ACC evidence
Read more:
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...cc-evidence-20130515-2jmyh.html#ixzz2TNoE7f3P
Cronulla players are likely to be still arguing with the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority this time next year, when Essendon players will have already served their suspensions.
That is the most likely scenario, unless federal government lawyers succeed in gaining immediate permission to use evidence collected by the Australian Crime Commission. ASADA and the ACC have a mountain of information, including testimony by guilty parties and emails and text messages, but some of the ACC material cannot be used as evidence against the NRL and AFL players because it was gained by coercion.
Government lawyers are working late to devise ways the material can be supplied to ASADA in order to build a stronger case against players and coaches.
The Sharks are gambling that ASADA does not have sufficient evidence against them, basically taking the view: We don't know what drugs we took, and the people who injected us aren't talking either. The NRL appears to be supporting them in this stance, insisting the players should be allowed their common law right not to incriminate themselves.
Advertisement
After all, the Cronulla players' NRL contract obliges them to co-operate with ASADA, and this could be interpreted as reporting for an interview. If David Gallop were still in charge at the NRL, it would be different.
Gallop is deputy chairman of the Australian Sports Commission - the federal government's sport funding and policy arm - meaning he would feel obliged to demand Cronulla comply with all the requests of another federal government body. However, another lawyer and former chairman of an NRL club, Newcastle's Michael Hill, supports the Cronulla players' stance, pointing out they already have short careers. ''The players also have the moral and legal backing of 200 years of the Australian system of law, that is, that if you accuse someone of doing something, you have to prove it,'' Hill said.
A player's contractual obligation to co-operate with ASADA is different to WADA's ''substantial assistance'' clause. This applies only to players who plead guilty and seek a 75 per cent reduction in their sanction, taking it from two years to six months. Although the Cronulla and Essendon cases are mirror images of each other, the codes are poles apart in their dealings with ASADA. From the outset, when Essendon announced they had invited the AFL and ASADA to investigate them for doping violations, all the parties have been on the same page. When an Essendon player is interviewed, in attendance are representatives of the AFL integrity unit, ASADA, player managers and the AFL Players Association.
If all the Essendon players agree on the circumstances of the injections they were given and provide the same evidence to ASADA, they could scarcely be accused of dobbing in a teammate. It is possible all the guilty Essendon players could be served with six-month suspensions beginning October 1 and concluding a couple of games into the 2014 season. However, the AFL, Essendon and ASADA cant effectively massage an agreed penalty.
ASADA must supply an independent body, the Anti-Doping Rule Violation Panel, with a brief of evidence and a recommended course of action. It will ask the ADRVP to list the player/coach/trainer on ASADAs Register of Findings, the official instrument which lays a charge against him/her.
The ADRVP reviews the evidence and will say yes, no, or instruct ASADA to collect more material. Assuming it says yes, ASADA sends a letter to the player/coach/trainer informing him he has a case to answer. A letter is also sent to the NRL/AFL informing them of the decision.
It is then the responsibility of the NRL/AFL to issue an infraction notice, summoning the player to its own tribunal.
This answers those who ask: Why doesnt ASADA charge the Cronulla players? Why doesnt the NRL/AFL charge them?
The Register of Findings is the automatic trigger to a charge, and neither ASADA nor the sporting body can do anything until it has been set.
There is one more complication. Because the dealings are with government bodies, an Administrative Appeals Tribunal sits in the middle of all this. The player has a right to take his case to the tribunal, and the NRL/AFL will wait to see if he does this before summoning him to their tribunal.
Hence, the possibility the Cronulla case could drag on to next year, while guilty Essendon players could be back on the field by round two next season.
Read more:
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...cc-evidence-20130515-2jmyh.html#ixzz2TNo2q0k0
