Doping scandal: who is against Russian athletes, and who is for them. The loudest doping scandals in the history of Russian sports Martin Jonsrud Sundby: “Belov is a good guy and a great skier”

Photo: sportpharma.ru

The Russian national team will be suspended from participating in the 2018 Winter Olympics and sanctions will be imposed on the Russian Olympic Committee (ROC) - this decision was made by the Executive Committee of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) at a meeting on the evening of December 5 in Lausanne, Switzerland. IOC Chairman Thomas Bach said that some Russians are allowed to compete in PyeongChang, Korea, under a neutral, white flag - as an “Olympic athlete from Russia.” In addition, Russian athletes will be able to take part in the closing ceremony of the Games. But neither the flag nor the anthem of Russia should be present at the Olympics. Russia is also obliged to cover the costs of the IOC commissions to conduct the investigation - $15 million. Membership in the IOC of the head Olympic Committee Russia (ROC) Alexander Zhukov suspended. Former Minister of Sports of the Russian Federation (now Deputy Prime Minister) Vitaly Mutko is banned for life from visiting Olympic Games. Former general director of the Sochi 2014 organizing committee Dmitry Chernyshenko (now president of the Continental hockey league(KHL) was removed from the coordination commission of the Beijing 2022 Olympics...

Many expected tough decisions regarding Russia in Lausanne. (In addition, there were signals from insiders: the IOC has already ordered Nike a batch of uniforms for Russian athletes“neutral color” with the inscription “Olympic athlete from Russia” - “Olympic athlete from Russia”).

But few expected a whole package of tough decisions: “We have never encountered such manipulations and fraud before,” commented the IOC decision, the head of one of the IOC commissions that investigated unprecedented doping violations by the Russian side during the 2014 Olympics in Sochi. Its experts said that the Russian system of doping fraud can only be compared with the one that was once created in the GDR.

Russia has the right to appeal the IOC decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, which is also located in Lausanne. But the chances of a successful appeal, experts believe, are negligible.

2014, February: Sochi triumph

Late in the evening of February 23, 2014, after Olympic Stadium“Fisht” in Sochi completed a colorful closing ceremony XXII winter Olympic Games, President Putin, Minister of Sports Mutko and his deputy Yuri Nagornykh, head of the Russian Olympic Committee Alexander Zhukov, general director of the organizing committee of the games Dmitry Chernyshenko and several other senior officials, secluded in a small room, drank a glass of champagne in a “narrow circle”. Everyone was in high spirits, including Putin, despite the fact that the news from the capital of Ukraine was more alarming day by day: on the night of the 21st to the 22nd, President Yanukovych fled from Kyiv, embraced by the “revolution of dignity”. During the closing ceremony of the Games at the Sochi stadium, cameras repeatedly captured Putin's gloomy, concentrated face, dressed in a dark gray leather coat. But the euphoria from sporting victories briefly outweighed the geopolitical burdens: after all, Russia became the leader of the Sochi Games in the overall team medal standings - 33 medals, of which 13 were gold, 11 silver and 9 bronze. Thus, the record of the Soviet team (29 medals), achieved in 1988 at the Olympics in Calgary, Canada, was broken.

But in addition to the awards, the Games were also evidenced by 11 Olympic venues built on time and in accordance with world standards, and 25 thousand volunteers who promptly and kindly served the crowds of guests: the Sochi Olympics were attended by 1 million 322 thousand people. The 1.5 trillion rubles spent on preparations for the Games (data from the Olimpstroy Group of Companies) seemed to have certainly paid off.

The world press wrote a lot about how successfully Russia used soft-power in Sochi. And when the annexation of Crimea soon followed, many international observers even wondered whether Putin needed to erase all the image achievements of the Sochi Games in one fell swoop.

Leadership lasted exactly 3 years and 9 months, until November 2017. And then the IOC began to take away the medals from our athletes one after another: skier Alexander Legkov was the first to lose his two Sochi medals, followed by four more of his fellow skiers, the next losses were two medals in bobsleigh, four in skeleton, one in speed skating, then two more in women's biathlon, then two more - in the men's... By the beginning of December, the Russian team had finally and irrevocably lost its first place in Sochi - more than two dozen athletes were disqualified for violating anti-doping rules, the results of their performances were annulled. In the team competition, Russia dropped from first to sixth place.

2015, November: Run to Rio

An international scandal erupted on November 9, 2015, after a special commission of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) published (RUSADA).

WADA accused the Russian agency of destroying the results of doping tests (1,400 samples) of Russian athletes after the 2012 Olympic Games in London. The 323-page document testified to widespread corruption and massive use, including by eminent athletes, of prohibited substances. According to WADA, the removal of samples was done at the request of the Ministry of Sports of the Russian Federation and the FSB. Based on the results of the investigation, the commission recommended that the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) disqualify the All-Russian Athletics Federation (ARAF). In addition, the commission demanded that five athletes be disqualified for life. The list included Maria Farnosova (2012 Olympic champion), Ekaterina Poistogova (Olympic bronze medalist), Anastasia Bazdyreva, Kristina Ugarova and Tatyana Myazina.

The investigation, on which the commission relied in its document, was largely based on the testimony and materials of a married couple: the former chief specialist of the Russian anti-doping service, Vitaly Stepanov, and his wife, Yulia Stepanova. She is a member of the Russian national team athletics was able to record several video and audio fragments that formed the basis of the case. The recordings show how Russian coaches and sports officials convince athletes to take doping and give them illegal drugs. The athlete’s husband, in turn, told the commission about systematic violations during anti-doping checks. The same materials formed the basis of a documentary film by the famous German journalist Hajo Seppelt, shown by the ARD television channel. The investigative film “Top Secrets of Doping: How Russia Produces Its Winners” was aired a year before the publication of the commission’s report - in December 2014. (By the way, Seppelt, who was covering the session of the IOC Executive Committee in Lausanne, in response to a request from a correspondent for the Rossiya-1 TV channel for an interview, called the security and warned: “Next time, don’t even try.”)

After the publication of the WADA report, events began to develop rapidly.

November 10, 2015 The head of the Moscow laboratory of RUSADA, Grigory Rodchenkov, resigned.

Photo: The New York Times

11th of November French police have arrested the former head of the International Association of Athletics Federations, Lamine Diack.

the 13th of November The IAAF Council suspended Russia's membership indefinitely. Despite the critical situation, IOC President Thomas Bach still suggested that Russian athletes would still be able to go to the Olympics in Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) in 2016. Apparently, in the hope of this, ARAF then agreed with this decision, did not challenge it, and even expressed its readiness to cooperate and implement the recommendations of the IAAF inspectors.

"It was key moment for Russia, when it was still possible to turn the situation around, to return the situation to normal: to carry out reforms in the doping control system, to establish access for WADA doping officers to Russian athletes and inspectors to closed cities, in a word, to establish a climate of mutual trust, says NT Canadian sports analyst Gilles Carbonneau. “But instead, Russian sports officials began to deny everything.”

2016: Salt, water, “Duchess”

In January 2016 The former head of the Moscow Anti-Doping Laboratory (a structure of RUSADA), 56-year-old Grigory Rodchenkov, is leaving Russia for the United States. The reason is fears for their safety.

And already in February of the same year, two former RUSADA employees died unexpectedly and suddenly in Russia - February 3rd Vyacheslav Sinev passed away, and The 14th of February Nikita Kamaev.

In May 2016 Rodchenkov gave a detailed interview to The New York Times, which had the effect of a bomb exploding. Rodchenkov explained in detail how urine tests taken by athletes before the Olympic Games in Sochi were changed.

Every evening he received a list of athletes from sports officials whose samples needed to be swapped. Athletes also submitted photographs of their completed doping control form to determine which urine sample was theirs.

Having received the signal, usually after midnight, Rodchenkov went to room 124, which was located next to the sample collection site (room 125), where the treasured bottles of urine were kept. Officially, room 124 was designated as a warehouse, but Rodchenkov and his team turned it into a laboratory.

Through a hole made in the wall between two rooms, Rodchenkov transferred hermetically sealed samples to a nearby “warehouse.” There, Rodchenkov believed, an FSB officer picked them up, took them to a building nearby and returned them after some time with open but undamaged lids. (The WADA report later named the officer responsible for the substitution as Evgeniy Blokhin).

And already Rodchenkov and his team filled the bottles with “clean” urine - the one that the athletes passed some time before the Games. If necessary, ordinary table salt and water were added to it - a professional chemist and athlete, Rodchenkov knew well how to make sure that the sample did not arouse suspicion.

He also knew very well what to do to make athletes win. In their diaries, which The New York Times published literally a week before the IOC decision on the participation of the Russian team at the Olympics in Pyeongchong, as the leadership of the Center sports training The national team gave the athletes a cocktail he developed, “Duchess,” a mixture of three anabolic steroids and a martini.

“Athletes all over the world are guilty of doping, and the United States is ahead of Russia in the number of athletes punished for doping. But only in Russia, at least to date, has doping functioned as an institutional system.”

2016, July: “The McLaren Report”

Based on the diary and testimony of Rodchenkov, whose whereabouts in America are carefully hidden (many are convinced that he fell under the witness protection program), a new WADA report appeared in July 2016 - now disavowing the triumph of the Games in Sochi. The report became known under the name of the head of the WADA commission investigating allegations of doping fraud at the 2014 Olympics, Richard McLaren, a law professor at the University of Western Ontario (Canada).

Richard McLaren
Photo: howsport.ru

In the first part, published on July 18, 2016, the McLaren commission brought the same charges against Russia as with the London Olympics - the use of doping, substitution of samples by the Moscow and Sochi anti-doping laboratories, concealment and destruction of positive samples. All this, according to the commission, sports officials did with the knowledge and with the participation of employees of the Ministry of Sports. In addition, the FSB was responsible for ensuring clean sample results.

Here are just a few key points from the report:

The Moscow laboratory worked under total control by government agencies.

The sample disappearance methodology was a government-managed system adopted following the disastrous performance of Russian Olympians at the 2010 Vancouver Olympics.<…>

Through the efforts of the FSB, a method was developed for discreetly opening containers with tests to ensure sample substitution. The cornerstone was the formation of a bank of clean samples, from which samples for replacement were taken.

At an opportune moment, usually close to midnight, when no one else was in the room, a staff member would pass the protected athletes' A and B samples through a hole in the wall,<…>where Doctor Rodchenkov and others were waiting for them.

The FSB had an operating room and bedroom on the 4th floor of the laboratory building, and FSB officer Blokhin had access to the laboratory under the guise of a plumber.<…>Witnesses say that Blokhin entered the building in the evening when others were leaving.<…>Blokhin brought clean samples (B) of athletes to the laboratory from the FSB building.

The very next day after the publication of the report, July 19, 2016, the IOC Executive Committee made preliminary decisions regarding the participation of Russian athletes at the Olympics in Rio de Janeiro. It was decided that officials from the Russian Ministry of Sports and any persons affected by the report, including coaches and athletes, would not receive accreditation for the Games. As for athletes, the issue of their participation had to be decided by the relevant sports federations on an individual basis. As a result, 107 athletes were allowed to participate in the Games. A tougher decision was made regarding the Paralympic athletes. The International Paralympic Committee (IPC) did not allow them to the Games, and the Sports arbitration court(CAS) in Lausanne (Switzerland) later confirmed this decision.

In December 2016 McLaren presented the second part of the report (150 pages) on the use of doping in Russian sports. According to the report, Russia used a “unique deception scheme” that involved more than a thousand athletes representing winter and summer species sports However, not a single surname of the athletes was named.

The WADA report alleged that people were involved in manipulation of doping samples. former minister sports of Russia Vitaly Mutko and his deputy Yuri Nagornykh. McLaren was confident that in 2012, with Rodchenkov's help, doping in Russia had moved from a regime of "uncontrolled chaos" to a "legalized, controlled and disciplined" system.

In general, McLaren's new report fully confirmed the conclusions contained in its first part. The second report indicated that 44 samples from athletes who won medals at the Sochi Olympics were retested, and 12 of them contained damage and markings inside the tubes. In the samples of two gold medalists of the Sochi Olympics, they found an amount of salt that cannot be present in the urine of a healthy person (Rodchenkov did add too much salt). The names of the athletes were not mentioned, but it was noted that these two athletes won four olympic gold. In addition, two members of the Russian women's hockey team had male DNA in doping tests, and in a number of cases, foreign DNA was present in different urine samples from allegedly the same athlete. Sometimes positive doping tests were replaced not by clean samples of the same athletes, but simply by someone else’s tests. “Third-party actions were also carried out with the urine of 21 Sochi Paralympic medalists,” concluded McLaren.

His commission also came to the conclusion that the Moscow anti-doping laboratory several times during the preliminary check of doping samples, in a number of cases, simply concealed positive samples if they could not be replaced. The decision on each such case was made personally by Deputy Minister of Sports Nagornykh, the report says.

The system has been in effect since 2011, Russians used doping until RUSADA’s accreditation was revoked in 2015: at the Olympic Games in Sochi in 2014, in London in 2012, as well as at the World Athletics Championships in Moscow in 2013 and at the Universiade in Kazan 2012.

Thomas Bach, who has friendly relations with Putin and who was himself delighted with the organization of the Games in Sochi, wanted to be one hundred percent sure of the guilt of Russia as a state

Many sports analysts believe that it was the second part of McLaren’s report that made the greatest impression on IOC President Thomas Bach: the document contained evidence of the systematic use of doping in Russia in almost all sports, including the method of “disappearing samples” (the same bottles) - the system was very effective and allowed Russian athletes to take doping directly during competitions.

“Athletes all over the world are guilty of doping, and the United States is ahead of Russia in terms of the number of athletes punished for doping,” states Gilles Carbonneau. “But the problem is different: only in Russia, at least to date, has the use and encouragement of doping functioned as an institutional system.”

2016–2017: Oswald and Schmidt Commissions

* Denis Oswald, former member of the IOC Presidium from Switzerland, 13-time Swiss champion in rowing, upon graduation sports career became a lawyer. Samuel Schmid - former Swiss minister, responsible for the army and sports

Thomas Bach, who has friendly relations with Putin and who was himself delighted with the organization of the Games in Sochi, wanted to be one hundred percent sure of the guilt of Russia as a state. To this end, in July 2016, the IOC decided to create its own commissions under the leadership of Denis Oswald and Samuel Schmid* to conduct two independent investigations into the doping scandal. The first rechecked doping samples from the Games in Sochi, the second - the involvement of employees of the Ministry of Sports of the Russian Federation in concealing violations of Russian athletes. By the way, literally on the eve of the Lausanne session of the IOC Executive Committee, the Swiss newspaper TagesAnzeiter was surprised that it was Schmid, who had absolutely no experience in investigating sports fraud, who was entrusted with heading the commission - they say, wasn’t it more practical to resort to the services of professionals. However, Schmid has an impeccable reputation on his side. The same one that Mutko no longer has. And there are already enough professional experts in the Schmid Commission.

At the beginning of November 2017 Rodchenkov, who once promised with his revelations to “destroy olympic sport in Russia for the next 5-6 years,” according to the British newspaper The Daily Mail, gave new testimony under oath to the Oswald and Schmidt commissions. As a result of the first published results of the work of the Oswald commission Russian skiers Evgeny Belov and Alexander Legkov were accused of using illegal drugs and were deprived of gold at the Sochi Olympics. They were also banned from further participation in the Olympic Games. The final crushing blow was dealt to the Sochi Olympics.

TO November 29, 2017 As a result of the doping scandal, Russia lost a total of 13 medals. A number of athletes were banned for life from international competitions.

The price of triumph at the 2014 Olympics turned out to be much higher: a destroyed reputation, a humiliated country and the shattered destinies of an entire generation of Russian athletes

2017, November-December: Before and after Lausanne

November 16, 2017 The founding council of WADA decided to refuse to restore RUSADA's membership. WADA considered two points of the roadmap unfulfilled: Russia never fully recognized the conclusions of the McLaren Commission on the systemic use of doping in Russia and never provided access to doping samples sealed by the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation as part of the investigation into the criminal case against... Grigory Rodchenkova.

Meanwhile, in Russia, all the blame for the doping scandal was shifted solely to Rodchenkov, against whom two criminal cases were opened. in November 2017, he himself distributed doping among athletes and coaches, and also had access to the database of the Moscow Anti-Doping Laboratory and could change it while already in the United States.

However, the IOC was not convinced by this version of events three years ago. Just as the reorganization at RUSADA was not convincing, including the change of leadership, which even seemed to be positively received by Olympic officials. Neither the Kremlin’s attempts to avoid aggravating the situation, nor the various signals sent to the IOC - do not bring Russia to the point of boycotting the Olympics (as stated by presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov), nor the good personal relations between Putin and Bach could stop that snowball , which began to pick up speed on the slopes of Sochi, and stopped on the approaches to the South Korean Pyeongchang. The triumph at the 2014 Olympics was ensured by the mutual responsibility of liars and schemers in power. The price of this triumph turned out to be too high: a destroyed reputation, a humiliated country and the shattered destinies of an entire generation of Russian athletes.

Economic sanctions were followed by sports ones - and at the very moment when Putin’s plans, as political scientist Kirill Rogov aptly noted, did not include a new round of confrontation with the West

But this is not the end yet. After the IOC's decision, politics will inevitably invade sports, and quite heavily and perhaps even rudely. Our fellow citizens last years the authorities persistently, using all methods and forms of propaganda, convinced that they were living in a regime of a besieged fortress - there were enemies all around, they did not like Russia... Now, economic sanctions were followed by sports ones. And they followed at the very moment when Putin’s plans, as political scientist Kirill Rogov aptly noted, did not include a new round of confrontation with the West. It turns out that this confrontation already follows its own logic and the Kremlin is unable to influence it. Therefore, many analysts, remembering after the IOC decision in Lausanne that Russia had previously rejected the option of participating in the 2018 Games under neutral flag, they are wondering: how will Putin respond?

Most likely, Kirill Rogov sneers on his Facebook, starting tomorrow they will begin to convince us that Rodchenkov came up with everything about the hole in the wall through which Olympic urine was replaced. Just as before, Litvinenko and the British came up with everything about polonium, and the “ukrops” and the West came up with everything about a Malaysian Boeing being shot down by a Russian “beech”. And so on.

On the evening of December 5, members of the Russian delegation in Lausanne, after the IOC decision was made public, held a press conference only for Russian journalists. But foreigners were ordered not to be allowed in. Apparently, as foreign agents.

Amendments to anti-doping legislation are planned to apply not only to coaches, but also to instructors, doctors and other personnel interacting with the athlete. Each of them can be suspended from work if the fact of manipulation with a prohibited drug is established even outside the competitive period. Such norms are contained in a bill submitted to the State Duma, the second reading of which is scheduled for early December. At the same time, deputies will consider the initiative to create an industry certification system sports trainers. The Ministry of Sports told Izvestia that they support both innovations. Experts believe that solving the problem requires, first of all, effective law enforcement and “anti-doping education.”

The State Duma is preparing for the second reading two draft amendments amending the law “On Physical Culture and Sports in Russian Federation" Both were introduced in September 2017 by deputies from the LDPR, and later supported by the relevant committee, parliamentarians from other factions and the Ministry of Sports. At the same time, the authors of the documents were recommended to finalize them. The amendments are already ready, and the projects are scheduled to be considered at a meeting of the chamber in December.

The initiative to suspend coaches from work for violating Russian and international anti-doping rules implies three reasons for making such a decision. The first is if the mentor is found in possession of a prohibited drug or it is proven that he distributed it (both during and outside of competitions). The second is an attempt to falsify control samples, and the third is if “facts of intentional complicity” in the use of doping by an athlete are established.

In November, the government made its additions to the bill, proposing to expand the Labor Code with a similar provision. Also, the amendments (Izvestia has them) were prepared by one of the authors of the project, Dmitry Svishchev (LDPR) and Valery Gazzaev (A Just Russia). Deputies proposed to include in the list of those who are subject to the law, “other specialists in the field physical culture and sports." As practice shows, anti-doping rules often violated by trainers, sports medicine specialists or other athlete personnel, the parliamentarians said.

The second bill is aimed at creating a certification system for coaches, including Russian national teams. There are three categories: second, first and highest. The criteria by which certification will be carried out will have to be approved by the Ministry of Sports. The decision to award a certificate will be made by regional executive authorities and all-Russian sports federations.

The adoption of the proposed standards will allow us to move forward along the path of increasing the level of professional skills of trainers, the effectiveness of their activities, and also, importantly, attracting young personnel to the industry, one of the authors of the project, deputy Dmitry Svishchev, emphasized in a conversation with Izvestia.

He said that for the second reading of the bill, the Ministry of Sports, together with parliamentarians and the professional community, prepared a number of amendments to it. Thus, it is proposed to certify not only trainers, but also other industry specialists. The Ministry of Sports of the Russian Federation must subsequently approve their list, as well as qualification requirements and the procedure for assigning categories. The assignment of the lowest - second - category can be entrusted to local governments. In addition, the possibility of introducing an additional qualification category is being discussed.

The deputy emphasized that both bills are aimed at improving Russian sports legislation and bringing it into line with world practice.

The Ministry of Sports supports both projects and is interested in their adoption, Deputy Head of the Department Natalya Parshikova told Izvestia.

The bills are very important and relevant. The initiative to certify trainers is in accordance with the instructions of the president and will allow the industry to develop. The anti-doping rule is also overdue and will allow us to improve anti-doping measures in accordance with the plan developed by the independent public anti-doping commission, explained the Deputy Minister.

The problem of doping cannot be solved only by changing the legislation - this is a matter of law enforcement, Anatoly Peskov, a teacher at the Russian International Olympic University and a member of the board of directors of the International Association of Sports Law, is convinced. First of all, we need to put things in order sports clubs and federations, apply existing norms and “instill” complete rejection of doping, the expert believes.

— Russian s athletes lost the opportunity to compete at the Olympics in Rio de Janeiro based on a report by Richard McLaren. This report, as now noted WADA, does not meet many criteria and cannot be the basis for bringing forward a number of charges...

- If you remember, in the case of Rio, the issue of eligibility was transferred to various international federations - on the basis that they were probably better aware of the doping status of the athletes. The IOC received the recommendations, and a panel of three members of the executive board unanimously made a decision, but based on the relevant findings.

— Why was the principle of collective responsibility applied to Russia, which was not considered in relation to other countries whose athletes were accused of doping?

- With the same amount of evidence that we have in relation to Russia, this principle would be applied to other countries. In the case of Russia, the situation is as if a driver on the freeway was stopped for speeding, and he said to the policeman: “Why did you stop me? There are a lot of people going faster than me here!” The answer is: “Perhaps. And someday we will catch them too. But now you’ve been caught.”

- What is being done to catch them? We only hear discussions about “what to do to stop Russia”, about how Russia is to blame. In all this, if you like, the “persecution of violators” is now carried out only in relation to Russia. It feels like no one else is exposed to this.

“Russia is now in the spotlight. Trying in the media to present everything as if this problem is not in Russia, but in the IOC or WADA, is fundamentally wrong. Russia has a problem with doping. At least a general ban was introduced for track and field athletes, and given the situation, I think that’s right. I also agree with the similar decision of the International Paralympic Committee (IPC).

Many federations were hopelessly compromised by their relations with Russia. For example, for major officials of the International Association of Athletics Federations it was important to hold many events and championships in Russia - that is, the assessment of athletes was uneven.

It seems to me that they handled this very well in rowing, but has at least one judoist been banned? Can you guess why? Who is the honorary president of the International Judo Federation?

— Do you think that there are deeper problems with the federations themselves? I wanted to point out that International Union biathletes ( IBU) called the McLaren report controversial and closed 22 of the 29 open cases. As a result, sports federations make such statements, while the McLaren report talks about a thousand athletes, but no confirmation has appeared. Do you think the federations are simply trying to hush up doping scandals in their sports?

— From experience, I can say that international federations as a group approach the detection of positive doping tests without enthusiasm. But now WADA has received a database, to which McLaren, according to him, was not given access. The agency is studying it and, I believe, sees that everything is exactly as McLaren said, if only they get evidence. You may find drug test records that are against you—tests that were positive but then reported negative. And this is only possible if there is a well-developed scheme.

— Head of the Compliance CommitteeWADAJonathan Taylor said that RUSADA cannot be reinstated without recognizing the McLaren report.

— The Russian anti-doping agency accepted almost everything that was said in the McLaren report, but does not agree with the accusations that a certain doping program was carried out with state support. There is no evidence of this, but for RUSADA a vicious circle arises. Is the agency expected to admit guilt for something for which there is no concrete evidence?

— A “road map” was discussed with the Russian Anti-Doping Agency, and it agreed to it. Agreed to provide access to this database and samples held because a criminal investigation is ongoing. Agreed to take responsibility for the system of state support for the use of doping and provide access to closed cities. These were the agreements.

- But there is such a principle as the burden of proof— the rule of distribution among the participants in the process of the obligation to substantiate the presence of certain circumstances essential to the resolution of the case.

— I’m ready to repeat: these were the agreements. But they do not want to admit the existence of a system of state support for the use of doping. They agreed to this, and now they are trying to back down.

— As evidence, the testimony of informants is given - Grigory Rodchenkov and those who still remain anonymous. But it is not customary to consider this kind of information in court. Why then did they make an exception in this case?

- This is quite acceptable when physical security witnesses are under threat. Many courts provide for this possibility.

— Rodchenkov said he was forced to participate in a state-sponsored doping program. But it should be noted that participation in the activities of RUSADA and doping schemes brought him a lot of money. Why do you think he didn't make his revealing statements earlier?

— In the period before the Olympic Games in Sochi, Rodchenkov was part of the system. Then, after the publication of the report of the commission I headed, he lost his post as head of the Moscow anti-doping laboratory. Subsequently, he became aware of the death of first one, and then - less than two weeks later - the second of his predecessors in this position. Suspecting that things were not going well for him, he decided to leave the country.

Regarding his incriminating statements, I familiarized myself with Grigory’s testimony as part of our commission’s investigation. It follows from them that he was part of the system and was in no hurry to shed light on the violations being committed - and this is not surprising... He was well aware of the violations.

There were two more informants. They occupied low positions and were very well prepared, and their words were largely credible, as was Rodchenkov's testimony. However, McLaren did not take his words at face value - all the information coming from him was compared with the testimony of other witnesses, information from documents and other sources, and only then was regarded as reliable.

— Rodchenkov’s testimony formed the basis for McLaren’s report and statements about the existence in Russia of a state system of supporting doping in sports...

— Testimony, as well as documents.

“But, in addition, it is alleged that FSB officers opened containers with doping samples and replaced their contents. The Berlinger company, their manufacturer, stated that it was impossible to open them without leaving physical traces of the opening.

— The company is absolutely right. Physical traces were found. When examining containers that were opened to replace their contents, scratches were discovered. If you know what you're looking for, they're very easy to spot. There could only be one reason for the appearance of such traces: they were opened. Why would they open them?

— Returning to the Olympics in Sochi: 20 international observers were present at the Olympics, monitoring the doping tests. Why didn't any of them pay attention to this? After all, that was their job, wasn’t it?

— The change occurred late at night. Through part of a laboratory controlled by the FSB, to which no one else had access. Through a hole in the wall. The director of the anti-doping laboratory from Montreal (or from Rome, or wherever) was not in the building at that time. This is not surprising - the laboratory director’s responsibilities do not include catching FSB officers, who are also there under the guise of maintenance personnel.

— If what you say actually happened, it turns out that the laboratory made a serious omission in ensuring the safe storage of doping samples.

- Yes. And the problem is that this omission was intentional. That's the problem.

— You are a representative of the International Olympic Committee. It must be admitted that the McLaren report raises certain questions. Is it in the spirit of the Olympic Games to have such large-scale suspensions based on a report that many sporting bodies say is flawed?

— The decision to suspend the athletes was made by the IOC disciplinary commission under the leadership of Denis Oswald on the basis of specific and sufficient evidence. The Court of Arbitration for Sport upheld these decisions. This is not about any persecution - rather about following the rules. If you break the rules, you will be punished.

— You emphasized that the decision was not politically motivated. Nevertheless, it seems that decisions made in sports are largely political in nature. What do you say to this?

- In my opinion, this is not so - at least in this case. In sport there is a place for geopolitical and political considerations, the desire for equality between continents and gender balance. All this is taken into account when choosing venues. sporting events. But this does not hide lobbying for the interests of a particular capital. It's not that some countries have privileges and others don't.

— You’ve been in sports for a long time, you know how everything works administratively. It is difficult to remember a time when such close attention was previously focused exclusively on Russia in connection with doping. Despite another scandal in Kenya and claims that many British cyclists suffer from asthma, these athletes receive far less attention than Russian ones. Why?

“We have clear evidence of state-sponsored fraud.” It is unacceptable.

— Despite the fact that McLaren’s report raises questions and there is no significant evidence, you still claim that doping is supported at the state level in Russia.

- Yes. In my opinion, there was a lot of evidence of this, but not enough for McLaren to have grounds to blame specific athletes, but he did not do so. He noted: “I don’t have that information, but there are records indicating that they were on the list of protected athletes.” McLaren made no findings beyond his reasonable doubt, which is one of the standards of proof in criminal proceedings.

Thus, I believe that the McLaren report was mishandled: the IOC members, instead of taking note of this information and saying: “Thank you for shining a light on all these irregularities,” brushed off the report and called McLaren’s conclusions “allegations.” This is quite disrespectful to an extremely experienced arbitrator who has conducted numerous investigations.

Where did it all start?

On German television ARD At the end of 2014, a documentary film was released on the use of doping by Russian athletes. In particular, the film uses a video featuring Olympic champion Maria Savinova, telling how, with the help doping drug With oxandrolone, she manages to quickly regain strength. Also on the recording there is a certain person (according to the journalist, the champion’s coach Vladimir Kazarin) dispensing the medicine oxandrolone to the athletes. Although Savinova's face is not clearly visible in the video, and her confession is only a translation into German, the film caused a stir. World Anti-Doping Agency WADA announced an investigation into all cases of doping by Russian athletes mentioned in the film. In 2016, journalist Hajo Seppelt, the author of the film, admitted that all the documentary facts of the film are unreliable. The director's goal was to attract public attention to the use of doping drugs by athletes.

In early January, after accusations WADA in doping fraud, the former head of the Moscow anti-doping laboratory, Grigory Rodchenkov, moved to the United States for security reasons. And immediately after it became known about the death of the chairman of the executive board of RUSADA, Vyacheslav Sinev, who headed the department from 2008 to 2010. 10 days later, former executive director of the Russian Anti-Doping Agency Nikita Kamaev died.

In May 2016, The New York Times published Rodchenkov's statement. According to him, two weeks before the start of the Olympic Games in Sochi in 2014, the Russian Ministry of Sports approved the list of athletes included in the doping program. After this, laboratory staff, with the participation of intelligence services, replaced one hundred positive tests. Rodchenkov presented as evidence The New York Times emails from the Ministry of Sports. Vitaly Mutko appreciated the publication The New York Times as “a continuation of the information attack on Russian sports.”

WADA, On July 18, the World Anti-Doping Agency presented a report on the results of an investigation into the substitution of doping tests of Russian athletes at the Sochi Olympics.It follows from the report that the Ministry of Sports, together with anti-doping laboratories in Moscow and Sochi, as well as with the assistance of the FSB, participated in fraud with the test results of Russian athletes. Head of the Independent Commission WADA Richard McLaren emphasized that Russian Sports Minister Vitaly Mutko was aware of the replacement of dirty doping tests with clean ones.

How were doping tests changed in Sochi?

At the 2014 Olympic Games, additional doping controls were carried out by foreign countries. In order to commit fraud with the tests of athletes, the FSB decided to replace positive doping tests, for which a special technique was invented for opening sealed samples.

The opening method was demonstrated to specialists of an independent commission. During the investigation, samples from the Moscow and Sochi laboratories were checked, and traces of an autopsy were found on them. It also turned out that the DNA of the Olympic winner does not match the DNA of her sample.

Positive doping tests were replaced with negative ones when there were no traces of doping in the athletes’ urine. From the Team Sports Training Center, where the samples were stored, the FSB collected the urine and delivered it to Sochi.

As Rodchenkov stated, every day he received from the Ministry of Sports a list of athletes whose tests he needed to change. After that, at night, in the laboratory, Russian anti-doping experts and representatives of the special services exchanged dirty doping tests for clean ones. The test tubes, opened using FSB technology, were passed through a hole in the wall, the size of a fist.

In addition, Rodchenkov admitted that he had developed a doping “cocktail” consisting of three prohibited drugs (methenolone, trenbolone and oxandrolone) and alcohol (whiskey or martini). This mixture was called "Duchess". Russian athletes rinsed their mouths with it. At least 15 Russian medalists used such doping.

What does the WADA report threaten?

Let us recall that in November 2015, following an investigationThe independent WADA commission under the leadership of Dick Pound has already suspended the Russian athletics team from participating in the Rio Olympics. In this context, the report WADA may result in the exclusion of athletes and other sports from the Olympic Games.

The head of the independent commission, Richard McLaren, clarified that WADA there is no authority not to recommend a country to participate in the Olympics. However Ben Nichols, the commission's spokesman, announced "that the anti-doping agency is calling on the international sporting community to ban Russian athletes from participating in international competitions, including the 2016 Olympic Games in Brazil. This ban, according to WADA, should remain in effect until the “culture changes,” RBC reports.

The final decision regarding the participation of the Russian team in the Rio Olympics can be made by the International Olympic Committee (IOC). The head of the committee, Thomas Bach, announced his intention to take the toughest sanctions against individuals and organizations involved in doping fraud.

A number of countries are also against Russia’s participation in the Olympics. These include Austria, Canada, USA, Spain, Germany, Switzerland and Japan.

How do people in Russia react to the results of the investigation?

In a statement published on the Kremlin website, Vladimir Putin asked WADA to provide “more complete, objective, fact-based information to be taken into account in the investigation by Russian law enforcement and investigative authorities.”

Putin also promised to suspend the direct perpetrators of the forgery until the end of the investigation. According to the investigation WADA, direct and participants in sample falsification are Advisor to the Minister of Sports Natalya Zhelanova, Head of the Department of Medical and Research Programs of the Russian Olympic Committee Irina Rodionova, Employee of the Russian Sports Training Center (TSSP) Alexey Velikodny, Deputy Director of the Department of Science and Education of the Ministry of Sports Avak Abalyan. Although, according to Richard McLaren, Russian Sports Minister Vitaly Mutko was aware of all the frauds, there is no talk of his resignation. Presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov explained that “Mutko is not mentioned in the report as a direct executor,”

The lack of clearly defined criteria for admission caused criticism not only from Russian sports functionaries, athletes and officials, but even from the camp of the Russians’ principle rivals. “I’m surprised and shocked,” the Swedish national team coach is quoted as saying. ski racing Ricard Gripp publication SportExpressen. — We believed that all the names of Russians involved in doping had already been named and Ustyugov’s name was not there. The Olympic Games are losing their prestige. I’m sure our guys in the national team are shocked, just like me.”

17 criteria

Some of the criteria that the IOC used when deciding on the admission or refusal of Russian athletes to the Olympics are not new: they were named by the IOC immediately after making its decision on the disqualification of the Russian Olympic Committee on December 5.

Among those already known are the presence of the names of athletes in the report of the commission of Denis Oswald, who heads the IOC commission to verify the facts of sample substitution at the Sochi Olympics, and those included in the so-called “Duchess” list compiled by former leader Moscow anti-doping laboratory Grigory Rodchenkov. According to him, the athletes on the list took a cocktail of three steroids with alcohol, or “Duchess.”

Other criteria were also mentioned: the IOC, for example, did not hide the fact that it analyzed data from anti-doping tests that were taken from athletes during the Olympics in Sochi. On many of the containers for these samples, as stated by the IOC, scratches were found, and this, the committee explained, indicates tampering and substitution. It was also known that the IOC was studying the list of athletes who had canceled disqualifications for doping.

Most of the criteria published on Thursday by the IOC had not been previously named. It turned out, for example, that the IOC, together with WADA, checked the presence of athletes’ names in the database archive of the Moscow Anti-Doping Laboratory. This archive was transferred to WADA by Rodchenkov. Analysis of the archive made it possible to determine which samples in which doping was detected were recorded as “clean” in the WADA international anti-doping administration system (the system is called ADAMS).

In addition, the IOC, as follows from the published list of criteria, rechecked the doping tests of candidates for the trip to Pyeongchang and the data included in the “biological passports” of athletes, although it did not announce plans for repeated checks. It was also not known that the IOC would consider the absence of an athlete at the place of special registration in the ADAMS system as a criterion for the removal or admission of athletes. Each athlete is required to provide WADA with information about his movements and trips so that he can be tested for doping at any time.

The IOC, as follows from the list of criteria, also checked the values ​​of the so-called steroid profile of athletes - a set of analyzes of metabolism in the body.

The admission criteria also include testimony from unnamed sources of the IOC and WADA, as well as “information provided by the federations winter species sport". The IOC does not name the sources and does not say which federations provided it with information.

Russian athletes Yulia Guzieva, Galina Arsenkina, Yulia Portunova and Ulyana Vasilyeva (from left to right) during the farewell to the Russian curling team at the XXIII Olympic Winter Games in Pyeongchang (Photo: Sergey Savostyanov / TASS)

Olympics for young people

Experts interviewed by RBC called the published IOC criteria opaque. “This has never happened before in the history of world sports. A small part of the criteria are globally recognized rules, and all the rest are absolutely biased. Anyone can fall under such criteria if they wish,” the head of the department of sports medicine at Moscow State Medical University told RBC. I.M. Sechenova, former member of the RUSADA supervisory board Evgeny Achkasov.

According to the deputy editor-in-chief of the Internet portal Championat.com, Evgeniy Slyusarenko, the use of similar criteria when checking athletes from other countries would lead to their mass exclusion from the Olympics. The expert, in particular, questioned the criterion called “location in the ADAMS system.” “Athletes have an ADAMS application, through which doping officers track their location and come to that address. There is a term “flag”: it is set when a doping control comes, but the person is not there. If three “flags” are collected, the athlete will be disqualified. After a year, the “flags” are canceled. In the life of almost every athlete there is one “flag”. This criterion is quite controversial, because a person can miss the test for a million different reasons,” Slyusarenko emphasized.

Slyusarenko also pointed out the opacity of the “additional confidential information provided by WADA” criterion. This criterion involves the use of information from informants and “other sources.” “I don’t know who these informants are and whether they can be trusted. Data from the international federation - what kind of data is this, according to which a person who has not been convicted of using prohibited substances can be removed from the Olympics? — asks Slyusarenko.

Professor Achkasov believes that suspension due to a past doping suspension is a violation of rights. “How can you be punished twice for one mistake? If a person has served the allotted time in prison, we don’t just put him away again after a while. Since this is a principle, then let’s not allow all athletes who have ever been involved [in doping] to the Olympics,” Achkasov explained to RBC.

To be guaranteed to pass the “fine sieve of the IOC criteria,” Slyusarenko points out, you need to be a very young athlete who has not yet encountered the work of the anti-doping system. Thus, those in the first rows “for removal” are those who have already won medals, or those who seriously lay claim to them, Slyusarenko believes. “It so happened that due to your age you are “clean.” This is almost the only opportunity to obtain admission to the Olympics based on these criteria. It seems to me that the IOC has played it safe very much,” said Slyusarenko, expressing the opinion that before the publication of the official list of Russians admitted to the Olympics in Pyeongchang, new names of team leaders will appear on the list of those suspended.

“This is absolute arbitrariness and oblivion of all principles. Just look at the passage: we have suspicions, and on this basis we suspend the athletes. This makes all lawyers’ hair stand on end,” said RBC former director Rossport anti-doping department and ex-head of the ROC anti-doping service Nikolai Durmanov.

In his opinion, the IOC is guided by the principle “whoever we want, we won’t let in.” “All these criteria rely on each other: McLaren’s list is based on Rodchenkov’s testimony, Oswald’s commission is based on McLaren’s provisions, and in addition, all this is thickly sprinkled with phrases that we have more information, but this is secret intelligence that we cannot disclose,” - noted Durmanov.

Based on these criteria, the IOC may remove the yet unnamed leaders of the national team, the specialist suggested. “At the very last moment it may turn out that there are two or three more lost pages from Rodchenkov’s diaries. Or suddenly the commission of Oswald or McLaren suddenly remembers something, and right at the Olympics something suddenly becomes clear,” Durmanov believes.

However, in his opinion, some of those suspended may still be allowed to participate in the Olympics. “For the sake of PR, the IOC can give reverse and allow one or two athletes in, so that later they can say: you see, we are objective, we are not completely anti-Russian,” Durmanov believes.

The final list of Russians who will go to the Olympic Games in Pyeongchang must be published before January 28, ten days before the start of the competition.