The Institute of National Anti-Doping Organisations (iNADO) has called on the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to take a "principled approach" to introducing sanctions against Russia over the country's doping scandal.
Two IOC Commissions led by Samuel Schmid and Denis Oswald are currently investigating allegations of institutional doping in Russia and are trying to meet an October deadline to complete their work.
The Commissions were set up in response to evidence in the McLaren Report published last July alleging that more than 1,000 Russian athletes were implicated in the manipulating and tampering of samples at events, including the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympic Games.
Decisions on how to sanction Russian performances at Sochi 2014 and restrict their participation at Pyeongchang 2018 will be made following the completion of the Commissions’ work.
iNADO’s Board of Directors believe IOC-imposed consequences should be based on denunciation of organised doping and subversion of anti-doping in Russia that is "clear, unequivocal and forceful", and that re-establishes the organisation as a "leader in protecting clean sport and clean athletes".
"The magnitude of the failures in Russia must be recognised," an iNADO statement reads.
The IOC-imposed consequences should also be based on punishment that is proportionate with the facts and especially mindful of the harm to clean athletes, according to the Board, which states that dozens of athletes have lost the opportunity to compete or to have their rightful moment on the podium to "dirty" Russian athletes over many years and many major competitions.
"The consequences must be commensurate with the damage caused to clean athletes from around the world (including those clean Russian athletes failed by their sport system and its leaders)," the statement reads.
Furthermore, the Board has called for reparation of the damage done to anti-doping, to clean athletes and to the image of Olympic competition, and for consequences targeted to individuals and bodies that bear true responsibility whether through acts of commission or failures of duty.
Unlike the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) and International Paralympic Committee (IPC), the IOC opted against a blanket suspension of Russia at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games soon after the McLaren Report was published last year.
Instead, the organisation merely rubber-stamped eligibility decisions made by individual International Federations.
In this regard, the iNADO Board has called for the IOC to apply principles of the Court of Arbitration for Sport's decisions on the decision-making of the IAAF and the IPC with respect to their Russian member federations.
They go onto say that IOC-imposed consequences should be based on continued oversight for individuals and bodies responsible for sport and for anti-doping in Russia "to ensure organised doping and subversion of anti-doping is eradicated and cannot reoccur".
The one other call is for deterrence that will ensure such gross subversion of anti-doping and of clean sport will not happen again in Russia, or in other countries now or in the future.
"The IOC’s measures must contribute to restoring a level playing field for the present and the future, affect future behavioural change in Russia and elsewhere, and restore public trust in clean competition," the statement adds.
Earlier this month, senior IOC member Richard Pound warned that the organisation will face legal action, as well as damage to its reputation, if it only fines Russia for its institutional doping regime at Sochi 2014.
There have been reports that Russia stands to receive only a monetary penalty rather than a ban from Pyeongchang 2018.
The IOC denied that this has already been agreed and claimed that any decision will be fully dependent on the findings of the Schmid and Oswald Commissions.
Pound, the founding President of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), who chaired an investigation into Russian doping in athletics in 2015, claimed that the IOC's reputation would be as bad as that of football body FIFA if they were to accept the money.
"The IOC has to be careful that it isn't a case of "Well, there go the principles and it's just like FIFA"," the Canadian told the Mail on Sunday.
"If there's money, you can get around bad conduct.
"If I were considering this and I were [IOC President] Thomas Bach, I would be giving a lot of thought to the downside of coming into a lot of money."
Pound also warned that athletes who have been denied prize money by drug cheats could consider suing the IOC to receive a proportion of the fine.
"If it's in respect of the doping, I'd be inclined to say money should go to WADA," he added.
"But there will be athletes who have been cheated saying this should be used to pay the prize money I was denied.
"There is potential for backlash."