In a highly controversial speech at the International Federations Forum in Lausanne last week, Moynihan attacked WADA, saying the organisation was "toothless" and calling on them to adopt the BOA's draconian bylaw which prevents athletes found guilty of a doping violation from representing Team GB in the Games.

Tensions between the two were aggravated further when WADA declared the BOA "non-compliant" with its global code at their Foundation Board meeting in Montreal due to the BOA bylaw that prevents drugs cheats from representing Team GB at the Olympics.

This bylaw has been under heavy pressure since the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruling last month nullified a separate International Olympic Committee (IOC) rule banning any athlete receiving a doping suspension of more than six months from competing in the next Games.

The Danish Sports Confederation (DIF) this month abrogated its own rules forbidding former doping offenders from representing Denmark at the Olympics, saying it was the "natural consequence" of the CAS decision.


But the BOA and Moynihan have chosen to defend its bylaw and engaging in a war of words with WADA in move that Howman says is disappointing.

"The decision of the Board to declare the BOA non-compliant had nothing to do with the speech Lord Moynihan made in Lausanne, it came a result of the ruling from CAS last month," said Howman.

"CAS declared the IOC's rule 45 [or Osaka Rule] invalid and unenforceable and that any other penalty goes beyond our sanctions of a maximum two-year ban.

"The IOC has fully accepted that.

"WADA was asked to write and harmonise the rules across all sports and all countries so that any additional punishment is not compliant with the rules.

"The BOA is therefore not compliant with the universally agreed upon code and the speech that Lord Moynihan gave is misinformed.

"He didn't have factual basis on which he was making allegations against WADA and the BOA are trying to make an extra sanction over and above the ruling.

"This is not about the punishment itself it is about having a set of harmonised rules across the board.

"The sanctions could be changed and may well be change in future but the two-year ban is what has been universally agreed at this point and it is important to have clarity.

"So it is disappointing when someone of Moynihan's stature makes such misguided accusations."

Howman continued that WADA only chose to make public comments on the issue because Moynihan chose to go public first misinformed information.

"We had been in private correspondence with the BOA for several months and we only decided to enter the public domain in this dispute because he did," he said.

"It is important to remember that.

"When the BOA went public, we felt we had no other option but to also go public because people out would otherwise have been misinformed.

"This now rest with the BOA and it can go one of either two ways.

"Either they agree with the code and change their ruling, which they can do today, or they can take the dispute to CAS.

"It would not be a long court case because the dispute has already been to CAS and they made their decision on the issue just last month.

"But if the BOA decides to go to CAS, we would be fully compliant and abide by their ruling."

Contact the writer of this story at [email protected]


Related stories
November 2011: Doping row escalates as BOA declared "non-compliant" by WADA
November 2011: Exclusive - Moynihan accused of making "misinformed allegations" by angry WADA chief
November 2011: David Owen - BOA is adopting right approach but WADA faces bigger questions
November 2011: British lifetime Olympic ban rule to be tested at CAS
November 2011: WADA are "toothless" claims British Olympic Association chairman