IOC President: Lifetime Doping Bans “Not Possible”

Jul 9, 2015; Montreal, CAN; President of the Canadian Olympic Committee (COC) Marcel Aubut (L) and President of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) Thomas Bach cut the official ribbon during the Excellence Day at Canada Olympic House. Mandatory Credit: Jean-Yves Ahern-USA TODAY Sports

Photo Courtesy: Jean-Yves Ahern/USA Today Sports Images

The spate of recent doping allegations in track and field is bringing up new calls for athletes in all sports to be given lifetime bans for any doping violations, a punishment that International Olympic Committee President Thomas Bach supports but admits is not feasible.

“This is legally just not possible,” Bach said. “A lifelong ban does not stand any kind of challenge, so we have to accept this. It is a matter of human rights.”

Bach made comments at a recent press conference at the world track and field championships where the IOC and the international federation for track and field, the IAAF, addressed the recent concerns surrounding the sport’s top athletes. It also comes shortly after Sebastian Coe was elected as president of the track and field international federation.

Coe and Bach, both Olympic champions, began discussing the possibility of lifetime bans for athletes caught using illegal substances in the early 1980s, when they were athlete representatives in the Olympic Congress. According to an article from Inside the Games, Bach said the legal aspect of banning an athlete for life stands in the way of moving legislation forward with the World Anti-Doping Agency. Still, Bach said he will work with Coe to see what can be done.

A recent leak of documents by German television and the London Sunday Times earlier this month showed that more than 800 track and field athletes, including some who won Olympic medals, had suspicious results of drug tests dating back to 2001. Many athletes had substances in their blood work that should have raised red flags, but they were not punished.

Such a situation has not reached the swimming pool, but many in the sport have called for stronger punishment for dopers than currently exists. Russian legislators are seeking prison time for athletes who test positive, something not backed by WADA.

Bach will take part in a special summit in October to address the growing concern of cheating athletes, saying he’ll work on strategies for “improving the fight against doping in sport.”

This all comes at the same time that WADA is under fire for not having the authority to punish nations that have a large number of athletes serving doping bans. In swimming circles, Russia was on the brink of such a ban this year, with about a dozen athletes serving suspensions in a span of a year. WADA’s rules do not give that organization the ability to keep a nation out of an event such as the Olympics, leaving that to the International Olympic Committee. International federations such as FINA, the world aquatics governing body, had been called on to look into enacting such a ban on Russia if necessary. Russia escaped such a punishment and was also allowed to remain as host of this month’s aquatics world championships.

According an Inside the Games article, WADA President Craig Reedie wants to keep the conversation going about what to do with countries that have repeatedly violated the “World Anti-Doping Code,” which would entail working with individual anti-doping agencies to hold them more accountable.

“The Agency does however continue to work collaboratively with all signatories (WADA member nations) to improve their anti-doping programs so that consistent, quality, anti-doping programs are in place for the protection of athletes worldwide,” Reedie said.

Name*

Email*

Welcome to our community. We invite you to join our discussion. Our community guidelines are simple: be respectful and constructive, keep on topic, and support your fellow commenters. Commenting signifies that you agree to our Terms of Use

Name*

Email*

6 Comments

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

A.P.

8 years ago

Respectfully, I disagree, and I’m hopeful that lifetime bans will be imposed when evidence is overwhelming.
This is yet another example of the rights of all those victimized not being considered.
Competing in athletics is not a “right”, but a privilege.
If you violate the established rules, an organizing body should have every ability to institute a lifetime ban.
Do it uniformly, and consistently, and let’s see a court challenge.
This is about the credibility, and the viability of sport.

Simona De Lullo

8 years ago

Lifebans is the only solution. I was watching the world championship today and wondering who will be caught next. When the tv people introduced the athletes half of them had doping history…

A.P.

8 years ago

In fact, an easy remedy would be:
1) expectations are a “clean’ competition
2) rules violators are put into a “special class” of competitors so that they may compete against other cheaters so as their “rights” are not infringed upon. Of course that secondary class would be held the week after the main competition in a “no rules”, “free-for-all”. You can “run” the 100 meter on a motorized skateboard if you choose. You may even get a T.V. audience…

Tammy Lee

8 years ago

This is not a “human rights” issue. There is no reason they can’t issue a lifetime ban. Didn’t Lance Armstrong get a lifetime ban? No reason swimming can’t do it, too.

Michael Lawrence

8 years ago

“The Abbott World Marathon Majors, governing organization for the Chicago, Boston, New York, Berlin, London and Tokyo marathons, has an unpublicized policy that bans for life anyone guilty of violating anti-doping rules from participating in the six races, according to AWMM general manager Tim Hadzima.”

From Philip Hersh, Chicago Tribune. Lifetime bans in Olympic sports may be tougher to achieve.

Steve Ruiter

8 years ago

Careful reading of the article seems to indicate that lifetime bans would not hold up to legal challenge, thus while they could still be imposed, it would be ineffective and expensive, resulting in a worse situation rather than a better one. Add in the existing problems of false positives and legitimately inadvertent “technical” violations, and a lifetime ban seems too problematic to result in what people want to achieve.

Perhaps a more complicated schedule of bans of varying lengths might work? This might allow for longer bans.