Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
The curious case of Renjith Maheswarys failed dope test got further complicated after contradictory reports emerged over the triple-jumpers positive sample. This means that though it has been more than a fortnight since Maheshwarys Arjuna award was put on hold because of his dope past,the authorities havent been able to make their mind if the athlete is clean enough to deserve the honour.
While the Athletics Federation of India (AFI) has submitted a copy of a letter written in 2008 to the sports ministry,which states that Maheswary was suspended for three months for a doping violation,they seem to have goofed-up by not following the international protocols at the time of handing the punishment. As a result,the International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF) and World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) have said they do not have any record of wrongdoing by the athlete,thus tilting the balance in Maheswarys favour.
The sports ministry had held back Arjuna Award that Maheswary was recommended for last month,just hours before the ceremony after reports of his failed dope test in 2008 surfaced. With the AFI unable to produce enough evidence,the sports ministry launched its own investigation.
It is learnt that the National Dope Test Laboratorys (NDTL) analysis of Maheswarys samples showed unusually high amount of ephedrine,which has raised a few eye-brows. Normally,10 to 15 micrograms of ephedrine is found in the system if taken through prescription. However,Maheswarys sample contained approximately 90 micrograms of the banned substance,according to sources. Its an unusually high amount and it indicates that he had used the drug to enhance his performance, the source said.
No B sample request?
Furthermore,he was suspended for a period of three months by the AFI,instead of what has been suggested so far. The federation had written a letter to Maheswarys employers Railway Sports Promotion Board (RSPB) in October 2008,in which they categorically stated that he was banned for a period of three months for failing a dope test. They informed RSPB that Maheswary was suspended for a period of three months starting October 3 after his A sample tested positive. Surprisingly,there was no request to test the B sample by Maheswary,which is a normal route an athlete takes, the source said.
Consequently,Maheswary was not allowed to take part in any competition during the suspension period. The AFI,which was unable to produce evidence till now,submitted a copy of the letter to the sports ministry over the weekend.
However,in their letters to the ministry,sent over the weekend,IAAF and WADA have said they do not have any information regarding the dope test. In fact,it is learnt that the AFI failed to inform its parent body about Maheswarys positive test,a clear violation of anti-doping regulations.
In its letter,WADA is believed to have said that since at that time the National Anti-Doping Agency did not exist and NDTL wasnt accredited at the time sample was collected and tested,they cannot guarantee its sanctity. Hence,the sample cannot be used to take any action officially. According to the source,the AFI collected Maheswarys sample on September 12,2008,and it was sent to NDTL for testing on September 15. The NDTL got WADA accreditation on September 21.
That means the AFI did not follow anti-doping laws set by the WADA by suspending Maheswary for three months and they further violated it by not informing IAAF. As a result,Maheswarys suspension does not hold any international reckoning and he continues to have a clean reputation, the source said.
Lalit Bhanot,who was AFIs secretary in 2008,said he could not recall the sequence of events pertaining to this incident. At that time,I was busy with the preparations for the Commonwealth Games as I was a part of the organising committee. Hence,it is difficult for me to say what exactly happened back then, Bhanot said.
Sports ministry officials were unable for comment,however,a decision is expected on Wednesday or Thursday,when sports minister Jitender Singh studies the case in detail.