NEW DELHI: The hearing process in athlete Neelam Jaswant Singh's appeal at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne, Switzerland, remained inconclusive on January 26 despite a 15-hour-long sitting. A decision is now expected only after February 19.

Neelam had filed the appeal before CAS against her suspension imposed by the Athletics Federation of India (AFI) and endorsed by the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) for a stimulant violation at the Helsinki World championships in August, 2005.

Neelam's counsel Sushil Salwan has been given time till February 19 for a fresh deposition by an `expert' as well as to provide written submissions confined to the expert's opinion.

The expert, being called by the athlete, is expected to depose on matters relating to laboratory investigations, procedures and documentation.

IAAF seeks help

Sources familiar with the case revealed on Sunday that the IAAF sought the help of experts including the Technical Director of the Helsinki laboratory, Antti Leinonen, to rebut Mr. Salwan's arguments concerning laboratory procedures, findings and documentation.

Another expert was Dr. Olivier Rabin, Director, Science, WADA, through teleconference.

The IAAF is learnt to have sought to counter Neelam's contention that there were procedural irregularities committed by the Helsinki laboratory and even if there were lapses in signatures and alterations in the laboratory documents, these were of no relevance as far as the eventual adverse analytical finding reported against her was concerned.

It is learnt that both the AFI and the IAAF took the stand at the Lausanne hearing that there never was a "reversal" of any decision by the AFI panel headed by Mr. W. I. Davaram and no decision was taken by the panel on March 13, 2006 as claimed by Mr. Salwan.

Principal thrust

The principal thrust in Mr. Salwan's arguments is on the fact that the Davaram panel had initially exonerated Neelam, giving her the "benefit of doubt," and then reversed its decision on April 24, 2006, ostensibly under pressure from the IAAF.

The Davaram panel had become "functus officio" (no longer having any legal authority since it had completed its function) by the time it reversed its own decision on April 24 and the only way the "exoneration" could have been reversed was through an appeal by IAAF to CAS, Mr. Salwan has argued.

Neelam, who has served 17 months of her two-year suspension, and her husband, Jaswant Singh, apart from Mr. Salwan, were present at Lausanne.

The AFI was represented by Adille Sumariwala, a member of the Davaram panel and a former national champion.

Mr. Loh Lin Kok, an advocate at the Supreme Court of Singapore who is also the President of the Singapore Athletic Association, is the sole arbiter hearing the case.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail