International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Thomas Bach (front) awards (From L) Russia's silver medalist Maxim Vyleghzanin, Russia's gold medalist Alexander Legkov and Russia's bronze medalist Ilia Chernousov on the podium of the the Men's Cross-Country Skiing 50km Mass Start at the Closing Ceremony of the Sochi Winter Olympic. The first two have since lost their medal due to suspicions of doping. / DAMIEN MEYER / AFP

Can Russia be qualified for the next Olympic Winter Games in Pyeongchang, four years after allegedly frauding the antidoping system at home in Sochi ? The world of sport and antidoping will know in less three weeks, as IOC is expected to settle the case between December 5th and 7th, in Lausanne. Before that, WADA foundation board will give an indication of what it thinks of Russia’s progress during its meeting on Thursday, November 16th, in Seoul. In deciding whether to reinstate Russian anti-doping agency (Rusada), and possibly by giving a public recommendation to the IOC, WADA « will send a message to current and future athletes », Jack Robertson tells Le Monde.

Chief investigator at WADA until January 2016, Jack Robertson last spoke publicly before the Rio Olympic games, telling ProPublica how WADA president Craig Reedie had, he felt, hampered the investigators’ work on doping in Russia. Before the decision over a Russian presence in Pyeongchang, he agreed to give his feelings on how the revelations over the system in place in Sochi were handled.

The interview was done by e-mail, as Jack Robertson suffers from a throat cancer and is having difficulties talking on the phone.

The iNado has called for a blanket ban on Russian athletes in the upcoming Winter Games. Would you have signed this statement ?

Yes, yes and yes. Throughout the Russian doping scandal to the present, I have been steadfast in my support for a blanket ban of Russia in both the Rio Olympic Games and the upcoming Winter Games in Pyeongchang (9-25 February 2018). I saw firsthand, as did the leaders of WADA, the unparalleled extent of state sponsored doping of Russian athletes.

Never before has there been this level of organized cheating and complete disregard for rules. Banning Russia is not only warranted, but necessary to prove decency, honesty & integrity still matter in competition. For better or worse, the IOC and WADA will send a message to current and future generations of athletes by their decisions.

Wouldn’t it be unfair to forbid Russian athletes to take part in the Olympic Games whereas some of them were too young to be included in the doping system in place four years ago ?

A blanket ban would not be unfair. Teams have previously been banned for the doping actions of teammates, and these examples pale in comparison to what occurred in Russia. Should a Winter Games ban rightfully occur, Russia would only have itself to blame for corrupted paths taken. During the Independent Commission Investigation (led by Richard W. Pound, Richard McLaren and Jack Robertson in 2015), Russia was fully aware of the investigation, but yet showed no remorse and still continued to blatantly dope with no regard to the rules or clean athletes.

Russian whistleblowers estimated 99% of Russian athletes were doping and the investigation certainly supported these claims of high percentages of dopers. I have not seen anything to prove this has changed, and anti-doping and sport decision makers should not simply take Russia’s word that changes have occurred.

The IOC has introduced in its charter the possibility to fine an athlete or a committee in case of doping offenses. What’s your take on that ?

This appears to just be a means for select athletes, organizations and countries to buy their way out of punishment for breaking the world anti-doping code. In my opinion, this has IOC support in order to ensure Russia’s participation in 2018. I have heard WADA’s top leadership supports the IOC in instituting fines. If this is true, I will be gravely disappointed. WADA has a responsibility and mission to safeguard the world anti-doping code and protect the rights of clean athletes. The potential for bypassing suspension in lieu of fines is a bad path and will further diminish clean sport.

The IOC is seen as being keen to favour Russian interests. How do you explain this ?

I cannot explain this. I see the IOC’s decision making process as flawed and questionably compromised. I simply do not understand their decisions as it relates to Russia. In comparison, the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) possessed the same set of facts and made decisions where Olympic ideals and values were put first. The IOC has had the same opportunity as the IPC to honor those same ideals, but they have not.

Perhaps I should no longer be surprised. I remember a 2015 press statement by IOC President Bach during the course of the Independent Commission investigation, wherein he said that no matter the outcome of the investigation, Russia would not be banned from Rio. This was prior to the conclusion of the investigation and investigative details were closely guarded and confidential. What I could not understand was how he could know the seriousness of the allegations, but yet issue what amounted to a pardon without knowing the details of the investigation into the doping scandal. I felt at the time, and still do, that he has a biased preference towards Russia.

Were you surprised to see Craig Reedie and Olivier Niggli, WADA president and director general, blame the NADOs and sit on the IOC side during the IOC Congress in Lima ?

Based on what I have seen over the last couple of years, I am unfortunately not surprised. Many, to include myself, consider this a betrayal to WADA’s mission. Regardless of their attempts, WADA cannot rightfully justify this course of action. You can put lipstick on a pig, but at the end of the day, it is still a pig. WADA has seemed to straddle the fence of what I consider to be a clear black and white, right versus wrong issue.

Now the Anti-Doping movement feels completely abandoned as WADA has apparently thrown their support to the IOC on this matter. I know leaders within the NADO and sport communities who have lost respect and confidence in WADA, and can no longer count on WADA to do what is right and just by the world anti-doping code. It is important to remember there are many dedicated abd talented people at WADA who I have the utmost respect and admiration for, but I question WADA’s leadership since the departure of (secretary general) David Howman in 2016. It is my and others’ opinion that it has now become the responsibility of governments to come together to defend the rights of clean athletes and the decency of sport, and therefore I strongly feel this starts with a change of top leadership positions at both the IOC and WADA.

Russia officialy admitted there was something wrong in its sport. Is it an indication that it will change its habits ?

You must weigh this question on past experience and history. So the answer is no.

Do you believe Russian officials when they say the system in place back then has already changed ?

Absolutely not. Since the allegations were first publicly revealed back in December 2014 and to the present, Russia has continually issued mistruths, and many of those conflicting. They simply could not keep their lies straight. In public statements, Russia would give halfhearted admissions, but then those statements would soon be followed by adamant denials. I have yet to see anything closely resembling a proper and full admission or any semblance of remorse for making a mockery of the Olympic Charter. Until Russia provides full access to their athletes for testing purposes and additionally provides real evidence of change, I will not be convinced.

What do you think of the roadmap issued by Wada for Russia to be accredited again ?

Any roadmap to reaccreditation must first include appropriate punishment for past sins. Meaningful and warranted suspensions, not fines.

Is it possible today to lead a « robust and efficient antidoping tests program in Russia », as Craig Reedie hopes ?

If Russia is in anyway involved in policing itself, then no.