This is a special post, (click here for Part II) because what you see to your left and below, is a questionnaire, that has been developed here at ZEN Central, that is destined to the Signatories of WADA and its infamous CODE.
Note bene: this is NOT a WADA-approved questionnaire, but my own.
Each page reflects, on its right column, official text selected from the WADA CODE 2003 ("WADC 2003"), and on the left column are questions relating mostly to the legal text on that page.
I have hopes to receive some interesting feedback from the various laboratories (Currently numbering 34), who will receive a copy of this independent survey via email.
You can click on each page to receive an A4-sized jpg, which can be printed for study, if you choose to participate.
I have set up a special email account (at some risk of being slammed by various and sundry ne'er-do-wells, or worse), with the hopes that some readers will respond and offer commentary that can also be applied to the cause.
And what, is the cause, one may ask? Since I have begun tracing the trail laid down by WADA, under the guidance (I hesitate to use that term) of its President, Dick Pound, through the focalized world of cycling and testing, I have discerned one or more discrepancies in the WADA CODE, which focus more on the inquisitorial aspects and less on the 'due process' aspects of justice against Athletes accused of doping.
This is not to suggest that doping Athletes should not be rendered before Justice to receive their Doom - it merely points to the facts that the other players are ignored, in a more than curious fashion.
The Questionnaire goes page by page, through the Articles that should enforce the behaviour of Laboratories and other relevant Signatories, and I hope to have noted where the greatest lapses are to be cured, through prompt and unbiased revisions in the upcoming Madrid conference (Nov. 15 - 17, 2007), sponsored by WADA.
There is a post to follow, but I needed to lay out this work first, so I had in place the links to it for Part II.
Interested parties can spread the word, and Athletes more than any, should be following this issue closely.
After all, tis they who sometimes "die" in their sporting careers, at the whim of scientific testing gone awry, through negligence, inattention or improper training.
Being one who believes that he laboratories, as well as the Athletes, should be subject to unannounced testing and visits, I am sure you agree that were improvements are necessary, they should be implemented, not swept behind a curtain; they should be codified, not left to the man pulling the levers of a Sporting world that legitimately is doing everything possible to improve the balance for cleaner, proper Sport.
If you are not of a similar mind, I would respectfully request that you desist from antagonizing myself or others: we have lives, jobs and our precious time is worth respect.
If, again, you are not of a similar mind, please ponder why you resist the change towards a better, more objective and scientifically-neutral codified Sporting law system?
I spent many hours on this Questionnaire: the errors within are entirely my own misfortune. I apologize in advance if you find any egregious errors.
ç*”*”*””*ç”*”* ZENmud ”*””*ç*”*”*””*ç”