Become a Member

Get access to more than 30 brands, premium video, exclusive content, events, mapping, and more.

Already have an account? Sign In

Become a Member

Get access to more than 30 brands, premium video, exclusive content, events, mapping, and more.

Already have an account? Sign In

Brands

News

Press Release – Full text of UCI statement regarding Armstrong case

09/09/2005: UCI DECLARATION : 1999 Tour de France samples analysisAs we announced on Monday, August 29, 2005, the Union Cycliste Internationale(“UCI”) is undertaking an investigation into the recent press reports fromFrance. The article published by the French newspaper L’Equipe concernedtesting apparently conducted by a French laboratory of urine samples fromthe 1999 Tour de France. Our initial investigation has identified a greatmany issues and we are in the process of gathering the information we need.The UCI is currently unable to express any judgement on these cases, asit does not have

Don't miss a moment from Paris-Roubaix and Unbound Gravel, to the Giro d’Italia, Tour de France, Vuelta a España, and everything in between when you join Outside+.

09/09/2005: UCI DECLARATION : 1999 Tour de France samples analysis
As we announced on Monday, August 29, 2005, the Union Cycliste Internationale(“UCI”) is undertaking an investigation into the recent press reports fromFrance. The article published by the French newspaper L’Equipe concernedtesting apparently conducted by a French laboratory of urine samples fromthe 1999 Tour de France. Our initial investigation has identified a greatmany issues and we are in the process of gathering the information we need.The UCI is currently unable to express any judgement on these cases, asit does not have sufficient information.
 
The UCI has not, to date, received any official information or document.WADA believes that they have no jurisdiction over this matter, giventhat it apparently relates to urine samples collected in 1999, before WADAwas created. Moreover, WADA has told the UCI that on the basis of the reportsof the research done and methods used in this case, no disciplinary procedurecould be opened against the riders concerned and that in their view, theorganization responsible for investigating is the UCI. In light of WADA’sposition on this matter, the UCI has assumed all responsibility for investigatingthe matter. WADA has stated its willingness to assist the UCI with itsinvestigationWe have substantial concerns about the impact of this matter on theintegrity of the overall drug testing regime of the Olympic movement, andin particular the questions it raises over the trustworthiness of someof the sports and political authorities active in the anti-doping fight.The UCI reiterates that at this point we have no information at all aboutthe testing apparently done in Châtenay-Malabry, who authorized orcommissioned that testing, the reason for the testing or the manner inwhich the testing was conducted.We have sent letters to WADA, as well as an initial questionnaire tothe French laboratory, seeking comprehensive information about the backgroundfacts and what brought about the situation that we are investigating. Amongstthe significant questions we have, the most important which remain unansweredare the following:
 
Who commissioned and directed this research and who agreed to the public dissemination of the results?How could this be done without the riders’ consent?Why was the UCI not informed?How is it that the journalist apparently received WADA’s official reactionon the possibility of continuing the research with the remaining urinesamples, and on possible sanctions, on 22 August (see l’Equipe’s articleof 23 August), when WADA apparently received the information on these resultsonly on 24 August?The dissemination of the results being a breach of WADA’s anti-doping code, did WADA itself authorise this step?Has this apparent research on the 1999 Tour de France been widened to othersports events in France in the same year (Roland Garros, football WorldCup) – why was the Tour de France chosen?
Awaiting plausible answers, the UCI confirms its commitment to investigatehow and why confidential information was disclosed to members of the newsmedia. In particular, we deplore the fact that the long-established andentrenched confidentiality principle could be violated in such a flagrantway, without any respect for fair play and the rider’s privacy. This aspectforms part of our thorough and vigorous investigation into this matter.We regret once more, that WADA’s President Mr. Pound made public statementsabout the likely guilt of an athlete on the basis of a newspaper articleand without all the facts being known, and we appreciate that WADA’s Vice-PresidentMr. Mikkelsen has stepped in to state that Mr. Pound’s allegations wereunwise.As for the article itself, the author claims to have been working onthe story for four months, when in fact it seems that his “investigation”was limited to receiving confidential information related to testing conductedby the laboratory and confidential doping control documents, includingconfidential documents which he was able to consult at the UCI after receiving,under false pretext, the authorization of Lance Armstrong . His subsequentpublic statements tend to confirm that he was targeting a particular athleteand that the newspaper was only given doping control forms relating tothis athlete.
 
We are awaiting information that we have requested from WADA and thelaboratory, and we may be seeking information from the French Ministryof Sports and others. Once we have received all of the documents that existabout the testing and the disclosure of information, and depending on thecooperation we receive from the individuals and organizations involved,we are aiming to conclude our investigation as soon as possible.Finally, the UCI wishes to express the wish that governments, sportsauthorities and anti-doping authorities, which rightly expect honest andirreproachable ethical behaviour from sports men and women, themselvesrespect the fundamental obligation of fair play and examine possible sanctionswhich could be adopted, should infractions be discovered on the part ofany of those bodies.