Mr Allan Hird has issued a reply to the Sports Minister Greg Hunt’s proposed new National Integrity Unit. Here is an extract: "Chip Le Grand’s 22 May article, in the context of the Essendon case, quotes Mr Hunt as saying ‘if there is an independent arbiter in Australia, we would be happy with that.’ The implication here being is the AFL Tribunal was not independent. This is dangerous territory. The AFL Tribunal comprised two retired County Court judges, David Jones and John Nixon and a practising Victorian barrister, Wayne Henwood. Did those three gentlemen not apply their knowledge and experience in the law fairly and honestly when considering the evidence tendered by ASADA and the players’ defence team? Were they not able to determine the players’ innocence or guilt on the merits of the evidence and without outside influence? There is no evidence the Tribunal was anything but not fair and diligent and to imply otherwise is to impugn the character of three honest men". Mr Hird continues: "...The same Le Grand article states WADA believed the AFL Tribunal findings a ‘hometown’ decision and, therefore, it was prompted to seek a re-hearing before CAS. There is a lot to unpick here. Sure, it was a hometown decision in that three Australians sat in judgement of 34 young Australian men engaged in a domestic Australian sport. But the use of the term ‘hometown’ here by WADA is pejorative and is an underhand way of saying the Tribunal’s decision was a legal fix. WADA is questioning the integrity of two Australian judges and an Australian barrister...". Mr Hird explains: "...In any case the minutes of the WADA Foundation Board Meeting of 13 May 2015 put the lie to WADA’s claim it appealed because of the ‘hometown’ decision. WADA did not care what happened to the Essendon players. They were small fish in a small domestic pond. But the AFL Tribunal decision had significant ramifications for WADA’s ability to ping athletes world-wide in the future. For if the AFL Tribunal decision was allowed to stand WADA would have to prove, not merely assert, an athlete had taken a banned substance. The Tribunal had found ASADA had not proven its case. Thus, in future WADA would have to produce evidence that could be tested before it could ban athletes. Those eminent men and women of WADA found this unconscionable as the following excerpt from the minutes of a WADA meeting (pdf) reveals (page 30): ‘…WADA had appealed on Friday the cases from the Australian football leagues {sic} (34, potentially 35, cases). That would not help with the budget, but it had really been felt that it was very important from the point of view of principles. The initial decision had been questioning the ability to pursue non-analytical cases, and the level of proof required to win the cases and, at a time when the new Code was entering into force and putting a lot of emphasis on non-analytical cases, it was important to set the right precedent. Those cases were being appealed at the CAS.’ As the WADA minutes acknowledge, the Essendon players were dragged before CAS not because the Tribunal had erred or delivered a dodgy decision but because the three tribunal members had up-held Australian law. Australian law set the bar too high for WADA. WADA had to have a level of ‘proof’ that allowed hearsay and untested information to be ‘evidence’. The irony for the Essendon players of course is ASADA, a body established by Parliament, funded WADA in order that its boss could get the ‘kill’ he had been deprived of under Australian law. Read the full extract below. So......are we getting to closer to the truth behind the Essendon 34 saga? Please take the time to consider the possible implications if you consider Mr Hird's statement below, which was verified by WADA's own minutes, to be accurate: "The Essendon players were dragged before CAS not because the Tribunal had erred or delivered a dodgy decision but because the three tribunal members had up-held Australian law. Australian law set the bar too high for WADA". Oh dear.......could this sorry saga be, in fact, Pandora's Box? Innocent or guilty, Justice for the 34 just we want these players to receive a fair go. Kindly support a Senate Inquiry into this whole sordid affair by adding your name/details this petition, and then ask others to support it. If you have already supported the petition, take positive action by sending an email to the decision makers. It takes just one click or you can create your own email - go here to take postive action: https://www.change.org/p/senator-richard-di-natale-senator-nick-xenophon-senator-the-hon-george-brandis-qc-inquiry-into-ethics-practices-of-asada-afl-wada-anti-doping-case-against-the-34-essendon-football-club-players/u/19400777 Social media sharing tips: Use the main links (on the RHS of webpage) to share the original petition. Use the links below this update to share this update. 

 For further information, contact Justice of the 34 via their Facebook page. Thank you for your support and patience.