The Hindu : Sport : Neelam questions independence of arbiter

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Feb 16, 2007
ePaper

Sport

Sport - Sports : General

Neelam questions independence of arbiter

Special Correspondent

NEW DELHI: Neelam Jaswant Singh has questioned the independence of the sole arbiter hearing her doping violation case at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), Lausanne.

According to sources, after the initial hearing on January 26, as per Neelam's claim, she learnt that the sole arbiter Loh Lin Kok was the President of the Singapore Athletics Association (SAA). The SAA being a member of the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF), the arbitrator's independence could come into question, Neelam has argued.

Neelam, former National record holder in discus throw and gold medal winner at the Busan Asian Games, had filed an appeal before CAS against the decision of the disciplinary tribunal of the Athletics Federation of India (AFI) which found her guilty of a doping violation at the Helsinki World championships in August, 2005. The IAAF is a party to the dispute.

Declaration

It is learnt that in his declaration before becoming the arbiter in the case, Mr. Kok had only stated that he was the legal advisor to the Asian Athletics Association (AAA). "An arbitrator may be challenged if the circumstances give rise to legitimate doubts over his independence," CAS rules state. The rules also state: "Every arbitrator shall be and remain independent of the parties and shall immediately disclose any circumstances likely to affect his independence with respect to any of the parties."

Meanwhile, an expert witness, enlisted by Neelam, has pointed out several alleged irregularities committed by the WADA-accredited laboratory in Helsinki and raised doubts about the "chain of custody" and the identity and integrity of `A' and 'B' urine samples.

In her written deposition, Dr. Sumedha Saini, a Dubai-based expert in laboratory medicine, is learnt to have stated that inconsistencies in the laboratory report could cast doubts about the whole process, which in turn could compromise specimen identity.

Neelam's counsel, Sushil Salwan, apart from basing his arguments on the technicalities involved in laboratory procedures, has also contended that the Davaram panel, which heard Neelam's case, had no authority to reverse its decision after initially finding the athlete "not guilty." The AFI and the IAAF have stuck to the argument that there never was such a reversal. Neelam has completed 18 months of her two-year suspension.

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

Sport