Treacy rejects claim by TD
A new system was introduced in June that will allow any athlete testing positive to drugs to present their case to an Independent Disciplinary Body within a week of the accusation, said Mr Treacy.
“If Cathal Lombard had contested the positive drug test he could have presented his case to this new body within a week and the Irish Sports Council and the athlete’s governing body would also present their cases,” Mr Treacy added.
The Independent Disciplinary Body, made up of legal, medical and administrative representatives, was set up to ensure that Ireland complies with the new World Anti-Doping Code.
He was responding to claims by Oireachtas Health Committee chairman Batt O’Keeffe, who said the ISC annual report showed it could take up to a year to investigate allegations that their athletes were testing positive to drugs.
Mr O’Keeffe said once an athlete tests positive to drugs the governing body is informed and gives the athlete time to respond and seek a second test.
The governing body varies depending on what sport the athlete is involved in - if it is hurling or football, then the GAA will continue the investigation or if it is rugby, then the IRFU will carry it out. But the governing body can take up to a year to carry out the investigation and the athlete is not banned from competing during that period, claimed Mr O’Keeffe.
“This is a complete waste of time and the millions of euro that the ISC spends on drug-testing every year, because in some cases the parent body may have a vested interest in not confirming the athlete is using drugs,” said Mr O’Keeffe.
He says the Irish Sports Council should carry out the complete investigation once an athlete tests positive to drugs for a swifter and more impartial result.
The ISC currently contracts and independent company to carry out the drug-testing - they carried out 841 tests last year and six proved positive.
Three of these cases have been resolved, but there are still three cases outstanding.
But ISC chief executive John Treacy insisted that the system which Mr O’Keeffe is describing does not exist.
“It may take a year between the time someone tests positive to drugs and this actually appears in the annual report - but that is just because the test could have taken place in December and is too late for that year’s annual report,” said Mr Treacy.
But even under the old disciplinary procedure an athlete contesting a positive drug test must come before an ISC disciplinary hearing within three months.
Asked why there were still three cases of drug positive tests outstanding, Mr Treacy said: “I cannot say off-hand I would have to check the records.”
