New dope: Government reiterates commitment to WADA

Written By DNA Web Team | Updated:

In a new twist to the controversy, Union Sports Ministry says it accepts the code, including the contentious whereabouts clause.

Here is a new twist to the WADA issue. The Indian Government has said it is committed to the global anti-doping laws and fully accepts the new WADA Code, including the contentious “whereabouts” clause which has been rejected by the Board of Control for Cricket in India.

Reacting to WADA chief John Fahey’s remarks that he had asked the Indian government’s stand on the BCCI’s rejection of the “whereabouts” clause, Sports Ministry on Saturday said there was no change in its earlier stand of full commitment to anti-doping rules.

“The Government and National Anti-Doping Agency stand fully committed to WADA Code including the provisions related to International Standards of Testing and ‘whereabouts’ clause. We have informed WADA that there is no change in the position of Government of India in so far as implementation of anti-doping rules adopted by NADA,” Rahul Bhatnagar, joint secretary in the Sports Ministry and Director General of NADA said.

The BCCI officials were not immediately available for comment but the issue is now with the International Cricket Council which has referred the matter to its all-powerful executive board. The ICC has asked the cricketers of other countries not to file the whereabouts clause pending the decision. Coming under pressure from the BCCI, the ICC has also hinted that it might ask the WADA to formulate cricket-specific clause. On Saturday, the ICC, however, refused to comment on the Indian Government’s announcement. “India’s stand now and before has been the same. There is no compromise when it comes to doping in sport,” Bhatnagar said adding: “T BCCI has not responded to the ministry’s communication regarding the advice it sought about the whereabouts clause.

“In respect to the issue raised by BCCI regarding ‘whereabouts’ clause we have repeatedly been asking the Board about the advice they have sought. But we have not got any response as to what exactly was that opinion,” he said.
—With inputs from Agencies