Plenty of drama behind the scenes in Contador case

It seems increasingly likely that the legal wrangling in the case of Alberto Contador will not come to a stop when the Court of Arbitration for Sport rules whether or not the three time Tour de France winner should be banned for testing positive for clenbuterol during the 2010 edition of the race.

Rumblings of dissention started earlier this week when the AP reported that lawyers for the prosecution came “very close” to walking out of the hearing in protest. The attorneys for the World Anti-Doping Agency, charged with proving that Contador doped, were upset that the CAS did not allow them to call a key witness to testify at the hearing. Australian doping expert Michael Ashenden, if allowed, could have expanded on the theory that Contador may have had a blood transfusion on July 20, followed the next day by an injection of blood plasma.

From the AP Article:

Ashenden could have explained to the CAS that Contador might have had a blood transfusion on July 20 which was uncontaminated by clenbuterol but which perhaps was stored in a plastic pouch, followed the next day by an injection of blood plasma.

Under this theory, the plasma could have been contaminated with clenbuterol, but may have been stored in a different sort of bag—a type that didn’t shed telltale traces of DEHP, a plasticizer used in medical devices such as intravenous tubing and blood bags.

Lawyers for Contador, however, objected on procedural grounds to Ashenden testifying about that part of WADA’s argument, specifically about why DEHP residues showed up in the first sample but not the second, hearing participants told the AP.

Contador’s lawyers argued that if he transfused, clenbuterol and plastic residues would have appeared together in his July 21 sample and because they didn’t, the transfusion scenario was impossible. His lawyers also called an expert on DEHP who testified that plastics in Contador’s July 20 sample could have come from drinking from a plastic bottle, through a plastic straw or from other sources which had nothing to do with doping, a participant said.

It seems to me, however, that the WADA lawyers were still trying to raise an issue about the presence of DEHP. Since there is no WADA approved test for the plasticizer or for transfusing ones own blood, it’s more likely that Ashenden was not allowed because the was no legal basis to act upon his testimony.

The AP sources were said to be divided over whether Ashenden’s testimony could have been pivotal in the decision of the CAS tribunal.

Adding to the drama of the case, others are questioning the CAS’ appointment of Ephraim Barak as chair of the tribunal.

Barak is well qualified to be on the panel, having heard more than a dozen CAS cases in his career, but recent trips by the Israeli lawyer to Spain to speak on CAS issues for the Spanish Football Federation and at Spain’s National Sports Agency raised some eyebrows. That said, Contador’s legal team, as well as representatives for the UCI and WADA attended the conference at the National Sports Agency as well.

Contrary to the allegations in the AP article, however, WADA says that they did not protest Barak’s inclusion on the panel, saying in a statement:

WADA has noticed the article written by the Associated Press on January 11, and wants to clarify that during the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) hearing into the case of Alberto Contador at no stage did WADA challenge any member of the panel for a lack of independence.

WADA is now awaiting the decision to be rendered by CAS.

As with all cases, and following the approach adopted throughout this case, in order to maintain the integrity of the legal process WADA will make no further comment.

In what may just be boys having a dust-up in the sandbox, Leopard True Racing owner Flavio Becca insinuated that Team Saxo Bank’s training camp in Israel was intended to have some influence on Barak. On that matter, CAS spokesman Matthieu Reeb had this to say: “Normally we do not respond to such insinuations, but Barak is not for sale,” said CAS spokesman Matthieu Reeb.

For their part, the UCI is none too happy about all of the leaks, allegations and back-stabbing. A release on January 13^th said:

The International Cycling Union (UCI) condemns the publication this week of information concerning the Alberto Contador hearing before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

The UCI formally declares that none of its representatives have been involved in any way in this action which it deems incompatible with the good order of court proceedings.

The UCI confirms that it will continue to respect due confidentiality and the legal rights of all parties. Further the UCI reiterates its confidence in the integrity and independence of the Court of Arbitration for Sport and all the members of the panel.

The case of Alberto Contador is now in the hands of the CAS Panel. The UCI calls upon the sporting community to await the result of the deliberations of the panel with serenity and due respect for the judicial process.

Though only the CAS knows for sure, a decision is close. Rumors are that the panel is working to make sure that their ruling is watertight in efforts to avoid a further appeal to Swiss Civil courts.