No determination of doping made; technicality causes first of two appeals to be ruled invalid
Although one CAS ruling came today, the final outcome of proceedings against Jan Ullrich will be not finalised for approximately another six weeks, with the court ruling today that one of the appeals against him should be struck off due to lack of jurisdiction.
Ullrich was facing appeals from both Swiss Anti-Doping and the UCI in relation to the non-sanctioning of the rider over his links with Operación Puerto and the doping network allegedly run by the Spanish doctor Eufemiano Fuentes. In 2007 he was reportedly confirmed as a client through DNA testing, with DNA samples taken from the rider matching blood bags found in Fuentes’ Madrid clinic in May 2006, but was never given a sporting sanction.
In today’s ruling, CAS has dismissed the first of those two appeals, namely that of Swiss Anti-Doping. It has stated that it doesn’t have the jurisdiction in the case due to several reasons. The first is the ‘absence of a valid arbitration agreement between Swiss Anti-Doping and Jan Ullrich to refer their dispute to the CAS’, and that the written agreement signed by Ullrich when requesting a licence in November 2005 ‘related solely to the regulations of UCI, Swiss Cycling and Swiss Olympic.’ It pointed out that Swiss Anti-Doping did not exist at the time.
Secondly, it stated that because Ullrich was no longer a member of Swiss Cycling after October 19th 2006, that he was not bound by amendments to the Statutes of Swiss Olympic on 1 July 2 2008, replacing the former Anti-doping panel of Swiss Olympic with the Swiss Anti-Doping.
Today’s ruling is essentially a matter of technicality rather than determining if Ullrich was guilty or not of the alleged doping offences.
A clearer ruling on that regard is set to be issued in January, with CAS stating today that it was competent to rule on the UCI’s action against Jan Ullrich and Swiss Cycling, demanding that the latter impose sanctions on him. ‘The CAS has already recognised its jurisdiction officially in that particular case and will issue its final decision in approximately 6 weeks,’ it stated.
Complicated ending to a long career:
Ullrich won the Tour de France in 1997 and finished second five times in all. He took the Tour de Suisse in 2006 and, with seven-time winner Lance Armstrong having retired the previous year was, along with Ivan Basso, the main pre-race favourite heading into the event.
However both riders were implicated in the Puerto raids carried out in May of that year and amid increasing pressure, neither were able to start the Tour. Basso was subsequently given a lengthy suspension, while Ullrich retired from the sport.
He initially protested his innocence, but more recently he and his manager have hinted that a different statement might be forthcoming. The latter stated this week that the former pro may speak about his past regardless of how CAS ruled, increasing speculation that he could tell all about his career.
However, given the additional six week delay announced by the court, it is possible that any detailed account of his position will only come after that point.
The full statement from CAS is as follows:
CYCLING -DOPING
JAN ULLRICH CASE (FIRST PART): THE COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT (CAS)
DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO RULE ON THE APPEAL OF SWISS ANTI-DOPING
Lausanne, 30 November 2011 – In the two appeal cases regarding the former German cyclist Jan Ullrich, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has rendered its first decision in the procedure between Swiss Anti-Doping and Jan Ullrich. The CAS found it does not have jurisdiction.
On 20 May 2009, Swiss Anti-Doping requested the opening of a disciplinary procedure against Jan Ullrich arguing a violation of anti-doping regulations by the athlete and requesting a life ban against him. On 30 January 20010, the Disciplinary Chamber of Swiss Olympic found it does not have jurisdiction and rejected the request. Swiss Anti-Doping filed an appeal with the CAS on 1 March 2010 in order to request the annulment of the decision of the Disciplinary Chamber and that a life ban be imposed on Jan Ullrich. The CAS arbitration was interrupted by several procedural incidents which delayed this matter significantly.
In its award, the CAS Panel stated that it did not have jurisdiction to rule on the request of Swiss Anti-Doping, taking into account the absence of a valid arbitration agreement between Swiss Anti-Doping and Jan Ullrich to refer their dispute to the CAS. The CAS Panel noted that the written agreement signed by Jan Ullrich at the time of his request for a licence at Swiss Cycling in November 2005 related solely to the regulations of UCI, Swiss Cycling and Swiss Olympic. At that time, Swiss Anti-Doping did not yet exist. Furthermore, the amendments to the Statutes of Swiss Olympic on 1 July 2 2008 establishing the creation of Swiss Anti-Doping in replacement of the former Anti-doping Panel of Swiss Olympic could not be opposed to Jan Ullrich, considering that he was no longer a member of Swiss Cycling as from 19 October 2006.
This first CAS decision does not prejudge the forthcoming decision in the arbitration procedure between the International Cycling Union (UCI), Jan Ullrich & Swiss Cycling. In this second case, the UCI challenges the same decision of the Disciplinary Chamber of Swiss Olympic of 30 January 2010 and requests the CAS to impose sanctions against Jan Ullrich. The CAS has already recognised its jurisdiction officially in that particular case and will issue its final decision in approximately 6 weeks.