The show jumper, who celebrated his 50th birthday today, was fined and suspended from competition for four months when his horse Tackeray tested positive for a banned substance at an event in France last May.

Under the BOA bye-law 25, the Yorkshireman was then automatically rendered ineligible to represent Britain at future Olympics.

The BOA said in a statement that his eligibility for selection had been restored on appeal because there were significant mitigating circumstances.

Whitaker was banned after Tackeray, a stallion, tested positive to traces of altrenogest, found in the product Regumate, which can be given legally to mares.

It is used to modify estrous-related behaviours that interfere with performance.

Whitaker said at the time that there was a mix-up with a feed that was meant for his top mare, Portofino.

As well as the ban, Whitaker's fine amounted to £1,362 including costs.

The BOA bye-law has now been upheld in only three cases and athletes with doping records who appeal against can normally expect to be cleared, it appears.

Among the high-profile cases of athletes who have appealed successfully recently are Christine Ohuruogu (pictured), who went on to lift the Olympic 400 metres title within a year of being cleared, and world triathlon champion Tim Don.

The rule, which while supported in Britain by the likes of London 2012 chairman Sebastian Coe and International Olympic Committee Executive Board member Sir Craig Reedie, has drawn criticism abroad as being too draconian from high-profile anti-drugs campaigners such as Dick Pound, the former chairman of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), and Edwin Moses, the 1976 and 1984 Olympic 400m hurdles champion.

On the eve of the Beijing Olympics in 2008 sprinter Dwain Chambers lost a case in the High Court which sought to have the by-law overturned on the basis that it was unlawful.

But several legal experts continue to believe that the by-law is incompatible with with the WADA Anti-Doping Code, to which the BOA is a signatory, and not withstand a proper legal challenge.

Whitaker's appeal to be allowed to compete at London 2012 was considered by the BOA Appeals Panel, chaired by Nicholas Stewart QC, and Whitaker's appeal was based on the grounds that the doping offence was minor, and/or significant mitigating circumstances existed in relation to the offence.

It said there was no evidence that Whitaker had deliberately administered the prohibited substance. 

A panel also found that there was "no reasonable basis for concluding that Whitaker (or his groom) deliberately administered the prohibited substance".

The panel said the offence could not be regarded as minor, but it allowed the appeal on the grounds of significant mitigating circumstances.

It recognised that Whitaker was "not personally negligent or at fault in relation to any systems, instructions or delegation about which he could have been expected to do anything more."

Whitaker said: "I'm really pleased with the result.

"We left the appeal not knowing which way it was going to go, so it is a relief.

"I've got a couple of good horses, Amai and Rockim, who I'll be aiming for 2012."

Whitaker, a team silver medallist with his brother John at the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics, had to pull out of the last Beijing Games when his horse went lame.

Contact the writer of this story at [email protected]


Related stories
January 2010: Massive Olympic sponsorship deal for banned Whitaker
November 2009: Whitaker claims World Cup victory on return from drugs ban
September 2009: Whitaker London Olympic place in jeopardy after being found guilty of doping
September 2009: Date set for Whitaker doping hearing
June 2009: Exclusive - British star latest top rider to be banned