Doping and human rights

[DaGonz]

But I would be interested to see their reasons for declining universal jurisdiction.

Well for starters, it's pretty non binding.... for instance Australia just happens to ignore parts of Intermantional Human Rights legislation w.r.t Asylum seekers. The United States is doing pretty well at ignoring parts of the Geneva convention (espeically w.r.t Iraq) to which there was some kufuffle about (they didn't want any of their soldiers implicated...)

Certainly to the best of my knowledge (1 subject at uni) the highest piece of legistlation you can argue in Australia is the Constitution. International and foreign laws may influence our legislation but you can't wander down to your local court and argue someone violated X international Law. There is no "over powering mandate..." Governments pick and choose when to enforce International law when it is politically convenient for them to do so. Countries under the EU might be a little more messy.... but I imagine there would be some over riding "rights and responsibilites" under a EU constitution of sorts which each country has signed to.

The more I read and the more I think about this, this is a smoke and mirror defence:

The right to legal defence? but he's not being charged with a crime, he's being asked to fill out a contractural obligation. There are no legal consequences if he refuses, there are contractural ones though. The implications if he wins here include needing to have a lawyer. UCI/WADA could easily rebutt "sure, but we won't let you race unless you do the tests... you might want to travel with your lawyer a bit more often"

The right to privacy, well maybe, but he agreed to be tested as part of his contract with the UCI. He even told them where he would be! He could have lied, Rasmussin did... he wouldn't have broken any laws in doing so... Didn't we just crucify Rasmussin a few months ago for defying this obligation? is the mob that fickle Cassius?

Anti doping agencies arn't legal entities, they can't force you to do anything you didn't already agree to. It might be a shitty condition for their job, but I know quite a few people on the end of a phone 24x7x365 who still get paid alot, but not the hundreds of thousands of euros these guys are on.

Again, perhaps if this guy hadn't already been done for blood doping he might have a little more credibility.

I cry for you Kaschechkin, really I do, your "human rights" have been violated... remind me to tell that to Amnesty international next time they come knocking, those poort blood doping cyclists have to do all those tests!. Maybe we could start the "Free Kaschechkin" movement?

Anyway, we'll see what comes out of the other end of the Euro Legal train. As mentioned before, I'm pretty sure someone tried this in spain against the national body recently, only to be told something similar (contractural obligation yadda yadda ) and havn't heard anything since. I would be disappointed if it got up though.

*shrug*

Cheers
Gonz

 

[liamo]

You're missing my point. This guy has been busted. Both his A and B samples have been tested in accordance with UCI and WADA rules and both have been found positive.

I don't think that point has been missed, just that it is a separate issue to the human rights issue.

Nobody on this forum has defended Kashechkin's doping actions.

There are however concerns about how far the testing regime has gone to catch a guilty dude.

If the UCI thinks it's ok to violate human rights in order to catch a doper and a court confirms that it's ok to do that too, then I say balls to professional racing. Your examples of countries ignoring human rights is exactly why I'm frankly scared by the UCI actions. Just because the USA and Australia are dodgy as, doesn't mean it's acceptable!

While Kashechkin might be blurring the lines to get off, and I get the impression you are too, his guilt is not affected by a courts determination on his human rights. If the court rules in his favour that his rights were abused and he gets off on this 'technicality' then so be it.

Don't you see something fundamentally wrong with a governing body acting illegally in the quest to stamp out illegal activity?

 

[DaGonz]

If the UCI thinks it's ok to violate human rights in order to catch a doper and a court confirms that it's ok to do that too, then I say balls to professional racing.
...
Don't you see something fundamentally wrong with a governing body acting illegally in the quest to stamp out illegal activity?

I feel this process needs to happen. I wish it was happening adjunct to an existing doping allegation. I also don't disagree with the current requirements as they stand, though would be concerned if they went too much further, which is why I feel this process needs to happen in order to clearly draw the line as to what is acceptable and what isn't.

I completely resent Kaschechkin for using what I consider a loose interpretation of the law, or at least pushing the boundaries of the law, in order to escape penalties he knowingly agreed to under the rules he has known, and (clearly) fraudulantly earnt considerable amounts of money under for some time. If he did not agree to them, then why was he not campaigning for change *before* he was done for blood doping. I also feel that the phrase "violation of human rights!" has been sensationalised in this context, something I potentially resent the most. There are far greater attrocities in this world than whether an out of control blood test is a breach of privacy. I honestly find it tough to get past and overwhelming desire to tell Kaschechkin to "Suck it up Princess..."

I fully agree cyclists rights need to be protected and in order to do that, the boundaries need to be clearly drawn. I just hope that when all is said and done, Kaschechkin still gets a 2 year ban.

Cheers
Gonz