Experts were not provided the opportunity to review positive tests by Chinese swimmers, calls for reform at WADA

The doping saga involving Chinese swimmers at the Tokyo Olympic Games in 2021 takes another turn with FINA And WADA each taking a hit.

Chinese silver medalists at the Tokyo Olympics. Picture: Wei Zheng/CHINASPORTS/VCG via Getty Images

ANTI-DOPING experts were not given the chance to review the 23 positive drug tests by Chinese swimmers before the sport’s governing body cleared them.

The swimmers were permitted to compete at the Tokyo Olympics in 2021 despite testing positive for a banned substance only months earlier.

China’s anti-doping agency, Chinada, informed the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) in June 2021 that its own investigation had determined that the athletes had been the victims of contamination, allegedly sourced to a hotel kitchen where they had been staying. WADA and FINA, the global governing body that has since been rebranded as World Aquatics, were invited to review the evidence that was supplied to them by Chinada. They could have then taken the case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) but chose not to appeal against the decision taken in China.

FINA decided to share the evidence with only the chairman of its Doping Control Review Board, Dr Jordi Segura, and not the other members. Among those excluded was Pieter van der Merwe, the head of South Africa’s WADA- accredited anti-doping laboratory.

A lack of transparency and oversight in the process has been a constant theme in this scandal, with Travis Tygart, the chief executive of the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA), complaining to WADA that the 23 positives had been “swept under the carpet”.

USADA claim the positives were “swept under the carpet’. Picture: Adam Davy/PA Images via Getty Images

Senior figures at WADA did not inform their own executive or foundation boards of the case, prompting Tygart and others to call for reform at WADA as well as a fully independent review of the process that concluded with the swimmers competing at the Tokyo Olympics that summer. Some of those athletes are also expected to figure prominently in the pool at the Paris Olympics this year.

Brent Nowicki, former counsel for WADA and executive director of World Aquatics/FINA since June 2021, has acknowledged that the swimming regulator’s review of the Chinese cases was carried out by just one man.

“It was conducted by Jordi Segura,” he said. “We had outside counsel to review the legal matters and Dr Segura independently reviewed the science and the file we received from WADA.”

In its statements after news of the 23 positives broke on April 20, WADA gave the impression that the World Aquatics review was far more extensive than one scientist. It noted that the “evidence” supplied by China had been “thoroughly reviewed by both WADA and World Aquatics, nearly two years prior”.

The Times understands the exclusion of all but the chairman of the Doping Control Review Board has concerned members of what is now the Anti-Doping Advisory Body, which replaced the board as part of a new Aquatics Integrity Unit.

Nowicki has acknowledged such opinions have been expressed, but insisted: “It is normal practice for the chair or another individual to review a case without the entire review board being part of the process. It’s standard protocol. Dr Segura is the science guy. If it’s a science matter, he’s the man for the job. If anyone had an issue with the legal argument, then they should have taken it up with outside counsel.”

World Aquatics Executive Director Brent Nowicki at the World Aquatics Championships in 2023. Picture: DBM/Insidefoto/Mondadori Portfolio via Getty Images

However, when the point was made to him that the review board boasted others with relevant scientific expertise, Nowicki also accepted that the organisation might now employ a different approach.

“While we are confident in the decisions that were made back in 2021, everything looks different with the benefit of hindsight,” he said. “We’ve already identified ways in which we could maybe have done better.”

Nowicki took charge of FINA at a time of turmoil. His arrival coincided not just with the 23 Chinese positives but the Court of Arbitration for Sport’s decision to ban Chinese swimming star Sun Yang for four years and three months after the American lawyer had acted for WADA against FINA and Sun.

Last week, World Aquatics informed national swimming federations that it had appointed a five-person committee to audit its anti-doping protocols in light of the latest China crisis.

A World Aquatics spokesman said: “World Aquatics [or FINA as it was then] conducted its review independently of WADA, so all questions related to their activities on this file should be sent to World Aquatics. FINA had the same authority as WADA to review and, if deemed appropriate, appeal these cases to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.”

WADA was approached for comment.

Originally published as Experts were not provided the opportunity to review positive tests by Chinese swimmers, calls for reform at WADA