Justice for the 34 has sent this letter to Senators today: Dear Senators, I am writing to you on behalf of 8,590 petitioners to request your support for a Senate Inquiry into Sports Anti-Doping in Australia. An inquiry is necessary for three reasons. First, there is considerable concern internationally as to the operation of the World Anti-Doping Code. There are inquiries underway in both the UK and the US, and significant court challenges in France and Germany. These concerns were amplified in a letter in June last year by Senator John Thune, Chairman of the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation (*link to Senators John Thunes' letter is supplied below). Secondly, the ASADA Act of 2005 needs review, not by ASADA or WADA, but by the Parliament that enabled it. As the Essendon case showed, the ASADA Act was not designed either for team sports or indigenous codes. It must be reviewed. Finally the Essendon case, which monopolised ASADA’s resources, is a case study in regulatory failure. As Senator Back rightly identified at Senate Estimates on March 3 last year “The proportionality is the thing that gets to me. The proportionality, I think, is grossly unjust.” It was unjust. Regulatory failure of this magnitude must be reviewed by the Parliament, not by the newspapers. The Essendon case should be revisited as part of a Senate Inquiry. There are three reasons why. First, the Blackest Day in Sport press conference pre-determined an outcome for the Essendon players. They were targeted by ASADA; and when ASADA could not achieve the outcome they required before a properly constituted Australian Tribunal consisting of two ex-County Court judges and a senior barrister, they referred to a Court of Arbitration of Sport (CAS) Panel. However, relevant evidence was not submitted to the CAS. Secondly, the ASADA investigation was compromised by breaches of confidentiality, by lack of independence from the sport’s governing body, by lack of consultation with other government agencies, and by inconsistency over the course of the investigation. The players were penalised three times for the same infraction (banned from the 2013 finals, banned from the 2015 preseason, banned for the 2016 season); and were denied the right of appeal to an Australian court. Finally, and most importantly, there is evidence that shows the Essendon players were targeted. The evidence shows that: (i) A program implemented at the Melbourne Football Club, similar to the Essendon program, was not subject to an ASADA investigation; no report was issued and there were no penalties. The program had similar injections as the Essendon program, the electronic communications were similar, the architect of the program was the same, but it escaped sanction. Melbourne did nothing wrong; and neither did Essendon. (ii) The text messages relevant to the Melbourne program were not presented to CAS. The transcript of a relevant ABC 7.30 Report of April 18, 2013 relating to the Melbourne program was not presented to the CAS; yet a transcript of the ABC 7.30 Report program of May 2, 2013 relating to the Essendon program was presented to the CAS. (iii) There has been a failure to present evidence relating to the Essendon program which clearly suggested the Essendon players being administered with a legal substance Thymomodulin (**a comparison of supplements programs is supplied below), not the banned substance Thymosin Beta 4. (iv) In the CAS Ruling para. 105, it states that “WADA is obliged to eliminate all possibilities which could point to the Players innocence.” Neither WADA nor CAS addressed this evidence. Regulation requires regulators to act without fear or favour, not to target. In the Essendon case, ASADA does not appear to have applied a consistent set of regulatory standards which would have allowed athletes to prove their innocence. This is a most serious matter. It can only be addressed by an open Parliamentary inquiry which allows all parties to be presented, including sporting bodies, athletes and regulators. It is in the national interest. Yours sincerely Philip Nelson on behalf of over 8,590 petitioners. * Senator John Thune, Chairman of the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. https://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/4bffa8b6-a87d-4b72-a17e-22511f34d3d8/1ECF41B6AB25AB09371463BEA1B5168B.jrt-letter-to-wada----final.pdf Thank you for your support. For further information, contact Justice of the 34 via their Facebook page.