Godara gets first list of dopers

Godara gets first list of dopers

Around 150 dope-flunked athletes were found to have gone unpunished as the respective federations did not take action or follow proper procedures, according to former athlete Sunita Godara, who has been fighting a case to get the lists of athletes who tested positive from 1991 to 2008.

Godara had approached the Delhi High Court asking that these lists be made public and subsequently, the Sports Authority of India submitted it to the court in sealed covers, which were later handed to the disciplinary panel as per the court’s directives.

These lists reportedly contain several high profile names in Indian athletics.
Godara received the first list on Thursday, containing 37 pages and it pertained to the period between 2001 and 2008 only.

It lists several cases already in the public domain, including the likes of Seema Antil and Udaylaxmi, besides a couple of Karnataka athletes, including a well-known sprinter.
Missing pages?

Godara claimed ten pages were missing from the list and said she had again approached the authorities for the first envelope that contains names of those who tested positive from the 1991-2001 period.

While most of the cases pertaining to athletics have been dealt with by the Athletics Federation of India, many have escaped punishment in other sports, evident from the blank spaces in the against action taken column.  “In several places the national federations had either not taken appropiate action or didn’t follow proper procedures under rules.

“This is shocking. This will lead to the opening of a pandora’s box in Indian sports as names of many dope-flunked athletes had not been disclosed for so many years and only after the intervention of the court the names are being released today,” Godara said.
However, it remains to be seen whether the anti-doping panel can take any action against cases in the first list, with the statute of limitations in the World Doping Code coming into the picture.

Action cannot be taken on cases older than eight years under the statute of limitations. Also, as per the Code, action can be taken only on cases reported by an accreditted laboratory.