Ali Jawad, Paralympic powerlifter
In recent times, anti-doping has been a prevalent topic within the sporting landscape. International confidence within the anti-doping system is at an all-time low. The disconnect between WADA and the global athlete community continue to increase. There has been a big uprising in the athlete voice and especially athletes are uniting in demanding transparency, honesty, and independence within WADA, when vital decisions are implemented that affect athletes and clean sport.
Throughout this disconnect, there has been significant debate on how the athlete voice fit within the anti-doping landscape. At present, WADA has an Athlete Commission, which is alleged to represent the athlete voice within the organisation. However, WADA decide the athletes that are on the commission and they are thus not elected by their fellow athletes. The commission has no voting powers on the foundation board, as they are considered an advisory group.
This has led for calls that athletes should have voting rights on the foundation board for key decisions that have implications on clean athletes, which has led to much resistance by some organisations. Another debate to surface through athlete groups is the opportunity for athletes to vote for the next president of WADA. At the moment, athletes rely on sport politicians/administrations to vote on their behalf.
WADA constantly claims to be athlete centred, to protect clean athletes and clean sport. However, athletes have no voting rights for key decisions, they are unable to vote for the next president, and are criticised by the authorities within the media. The question thus arises; is WADA then more driven by politics than by a sincere interest in protecting its number one stakeholder?