While the National Anti-Doping Agency NADA used to communicate its judgements promptly and comprehensibly, this is now done in secret. The database of doping proceedings, NADAjus, has been discontinued, proceedings are anonymised and only published belatedly in NADA's annual report or by sports associations.
Several doping cases in amateur cycling
There have recently been several cases of doping in German amateur cycling. The cases only became known to insiders due to the publication practice. One rider tested positive at the Bundesliga cross race on 17 October 2021 and an amateur at the circuit race in Serrig in 2022, both of whom received a three-year doping ban.
NADA takes a stand
>> We have asked NADA whether there will be any changes to the publication practice. Below is the written response:
TOUR: Following a complaint by a doping offender, the NADA database of doping offences was completely closed in 2021. Will it stay that way?
NADA: Yes, the NADAjus database will no longer be used until further notice. From the point of view of the State Data Protection Commissioner of North Rhine-Westphalia (LDI NRW), the publication of personal information and arbitration awards from disciplinary proceedings on the Internet in the manner previously carried out by NADA is not permitted. The LDI NRW also has legal concerns with regard to the legal basis for the publication of sanction decisions. The LDI NRW refers to the interpretation of the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
TOUR: How can the anti-doping campaign have a deterrent effect if penalties and offenders are not publicised?
NADA: It is important for NADA to emphasise that the protection of personal data and the protection of the personal rights of every athlete is a very high priority for NADA. Notwithstanding this, NADA's mission statement is to ensure the greatest possible transparency in its anti-doping work. In its view, this also includes publishing decisions by independent disciplinary or arbitration tribunals without restriction and in accordance with the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC 2021) and the National Anti-Doping Code (NADC21). However, this must not have the effect of pillorying athletes who have committed a doping offence. Rather, clear and unambiguous publication serves to protect unaffected athletes from unjustified accusations of doping. In NADA's opinion, the publication of incomplete sanction decisions without naming specific athletes harbours the great risk of stigmatising innocent athletes.
