Thursday 23rd November 2006

Peter Cousins pleased at being cleared for Olympic Selection

The British Olympic Association today confirmed that Peter Cousins, a judo athlete (and European silver medallist), has had his eligibility for Team GB selection at future Olympic Games restored following a successful appeal under the BOA’s Eligibility Byelaw.

In January 2006 Mr Cousins was found guilty of a doping offence in accordance with British Judo Association (BJA) anti-doping rules. He was suspended for three months, the minimum sentence available, for missing three ‘no advance notice’ out-of-competition drug tests within a period of 12 months.

This suspension expired on 22^nd April 2006, allowing Mr Cousins to return to his sport. However, he remained ineligible for selection for the Olympic Games.

Following an appeal from Mr Cousins, the BOA Appeals Panel, chaired by Nicholas Stewart QC, considered the case. Mr Cousins’ appeal was based on the grounds that:

The Panel’s clear and unanimous view was that the offence could not be regarded as minor. They endorsed the BOA view that ‘no advance notice’ out-of-competition testing is a fundamental part of ensuring an effective fight against doping in sport.

Nevertheless, the Panel did allow Mr Cousins’ appeal on the grounds that it was established that there were significant mitigating circumstances in relation to the offence.

An important aspect of this particular case was that the efficient operation of the testing arrangements involved an on-line system through which athletes are required to submit their whereabouts information. This was introduced and administered by UK Sport in 2005 and used by the BJA and its athletes as well as by other sports governing bodies and their athletes.

The Panel recognised that UK Sport had worked hard and continues to do so to ensure that the system is as user-friendly and accessible as possible. This is a view shared by the BOA. However, it was clear to the panel that at the particular time of these missed tests there were some technological teething problems and some understandable confusion. This resulted in a lack of understanding by Mr Cousins when operating the new system.

The Panel noted the BJA Disciplinary Committee found that Mr Cousins had not deliberately set out to miss tests by failing to provide on-going and accurate whereabouts information. On the balance of probabilities the Panel found that there were significant mitigating circumstances in relation to Mr Cousins’ offence and unanimously agreed to restore his eligibility for selection for Team GB unconditionally and with immediate effect.

Finally, the Panel emphasised that no athletes should assume that any of these points on their own would restore Olympic eligibility in the future.

Commenting on the Panel’s decision, the BOA’s Chief Executive, Simon Clegg said:

“As the Appeals Panel has indicated the BOA is unequivocal in its support for the principle of the ‘no advance notice’ out-of-competition testing system.

“Athletes must be fully aware of their obligations as part of either the national or international testing pool. They are required to keep their whereabouts information up-to-date and to ensure that they are available for testing. The very purpose of such a system and the obvious consequences of missing tests make it a central element in the anti-doping policies enshrined in the relevant rules and codes.

“Similarly, it is the duty of UK Sport and the sports governing bodies, supported by the BOA, to provide clear and timely advice and training to athletes to ensure they are able to meet their obligations. This is essential if we are to maintain the integrity of the fight against doping in sport.

Finally, it is worth noting that the Panel has very clearly stated that the facts of this case do not provide an automatic read across to cases in the future.”

Notes for Editors

The Sports Dispute Resolution Panel (SDRP) is an independent body, which provides a dispute resolution for sport. SDRP appointed the chairman to the appeals panel and administered the appeal in accordance with the BOA’s rules.