WADA removes Kenya from the World Anti-Doping Code’s non-compliant list

Following a circular vote of its Foundation Board members, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) wishes to announce that it has removed the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (ADAK) from the list of signatories previously deemed non-compliant with the 2015 World Anti-Doping Code (the Code). Kenya has drafted and adopted anti-doping legislation now deemed to be in line with the Code.

As stipulated in Article 23.5.5 of the Code, WADA will report the declarations of non-compliance to the Sports Movement and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).



When implemented properly, an independent anti-doping program protects the health, well-being, and rights of athletes, while preserving the integrity of sport.

Over time, global sport has evolved into a multibillion-dollar industry in which athletes and sport leaders serve as influential role models for people around the world. This influence means that protecting the values oan which sport is based is more important than ever. Doping is a key threat to the integrity of sport, making implementation of effective anti-doping programs on a global scale all the more critical.

Here are 3 key reasons why independence is a necessary component of an effective anti-doping program:


When a sport employs an independent anti-doping agency, it eliminates the inherent conflict of interest that exists when a governing body is tasked with both promoting and policing its own sport. An independent agency has the freedom to make impartial decisions to secure clean sport and protect the rights of clean athletes.

Recent history has shown that without an independent anti-doping program, it can be all too tempting for a sports organization to put financial considerations ahead of anti-doping priorities, a calculus which threatens both the integrity of the sport and the health of athletes. Even when well motivated, it can be difficult for a sports organization to demonstrate to its fans, its athletes, and to the media that its decisions are truly independent and not influenced by conflicting motives.

An example of conflicting motives are MICHAEL ROTICH, Kenya’s Team Manager of Track and Field, offered to provide advance warning of drugs tests to athletes in return for a £10,000 bribe during a Sunday Times undercover investigation. AND he was working for the Swedish anti-doping firm (Anyone who knows their name?) which has the contract for doping testing in Kenya. As I wrote then, it’s like hire a Lion to watch your Goats! How did he get that job, so he could warn athletes one day before testing??

We know from experience that when sports organizations is in partner with independent anti-doping organizations, it brings confidence to athletes that their rights are being protected, and that they can compete and win on a level playing field.


Along with eliminating conflicts of interest, an independent anti-doping agency is distinctively positioned to serve as an authority in anti-doping, bringing trusted experience and expertise to testing, results management, adjudication, and athlete education programs. Operated by autonomous experts chosen for their anti-doping experience rather than marketing or sports background, an independent anti-doping agency has the unobstructed ability to implement best practices and deliver improved anti-doping operations.

Over the past 15 years, sport anti-doping programs have increased greatly in sophistication. The latest programs incorporate high levels of scientific and technical expertise, intelligence gathering, and the ability to successfully monitor and test athletes 24/7 around the world.

To be successful, current programs must successfully interface with governmental and non-governmental agencies around the globe. Information sharing and collaboration for the benefit of anti-doping is typically optimized when these entities are dealing with an independent anti-doping agency rather than a sports organization performing anti-doping functions.


Numerous independent reviews of sport, including the Mitchell Report and the recent WADA Independent Commission reports, have made the important point that increasing transparency in anti-doping processes enhances accountability and trust. Additionally, transparency regarding testing results and sanctions is essential to increase athlete confidence in the anti-doping system and to deter doping.

Independent anti-doping agencies operating under the World Anti-Doping Code have, therefore, developed well processes that balance the due process rights of athletes with the undisputed importance of public disclosure of test results, case outcomes, and sanction decisions. Is Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (ADAK) such a independent anti-doping agency? Are the people in ADAK independent and trustable people? Because of the history of Athletics Kenya (AK) (requesting briebs from athletes), the National Olympic Committee of Kenya (NOCK), and the general accepting of paying briebes in The Kenyan community, particularly to public officials, it is legitimt to ask such questions about ADAK. ADAK has to have 100% trustable people as in other countries (except Russia).

Consequently, independent anti-doping agencies have developed the capacity to operate within the “relentless spotlight,” providing both the transparency and accountability to help sport live up to its true potential, while safeguarding confidential information until the time that disclosure is appropriate. For example, independence, transparency, and experience is valuable when dealing with a high profile investigation where there can be pressure to announce a result, but it is more important to defer announcement until the investigation is concluded.

Similarly, sports organizations are not best positioned to make credible anti-doping decisions when those decisions can impact schedules, sponsors, or competition outcomes. In these situations, anti-doping organizations are best positioned to make the right decision, at the right time, and most importantly, for the right reasons. Can the Goverment of Kenya confirm that ADAK is in this position?


Article reproduced from


Kenya to make doping a criminal offence

Kenya’s sports minister says new legislation to make doping a criminal offence will be presented to parliament on Monday as the country scrambles to avoid being declared non-compliant with world anti-doping rules.

Speaking on Kenyan television on Wednesday (NZT Thursday), sports minister Hassan Wario said “we are working behind the scenes” to ensure the proposed legislation is approved and passed into law.

Anti-doping legislation is one of the things Kenya has been asked to put in place by the World Anti-Doping Agency by an April 5 deadline. Kenya’s government must also provide proper funding for the new national anti-doping agency.

Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya chief executive Japhter Rugut said it received only US$3 million (NZ$4.5m) of the US$5m (NZ$7.5m) the government has approved for its setup costs 10 days ago.



Anti-doping Agency of Kenya: ‘Progress Made, Still a Lot of Work’

A country known for producing some of the world’s premier distance runners has recently found itself in the spotlight for some of its athletes using illegal, performance-enhancing drugs.

The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) announced in November it has been investigating Kenya since March for allegations of covering up doping.

Twenty-four-year-old Samuel Njuguna is a Kenyan pole vaulter and marathoner. He says it is “not good” that some of his fellow athletes have been involved in the scandal.

“Maybe you come in No. 1, but it is not a perfect,” said Njuguna. “It is not fair to others because can you imagine, I am working hard to work on that and someone is using drugs? It is discouraging.”

Kenya banned seven athletes in November for doping offenses, raising the number of drug cases to 40 in the past three years. This includes two female sprinters sent home from the recent world championships in Beijing.

Retired general Jackson Tuwei is the acting president of Athletics Kenya, the country’s national association. He said in all local and international competitions, athletes are tested for doping in what he calls a “very elaborate exercise.”

IAAF provisionally suspended athletics officials

“Let me say very clearly that it is not a systemic problem,” Tuwei said. “I think these are purely individual problems, and we want to say that it is a small proportion; but, we of course would like to have nothing of that.”

Tuwei is Athletics Kenya’s acting head because the IAAF provisionally suspended three senior Kenyan athletics officials for 180 days. The officials are accused of subverting the anti-doping control process in Kenya and improperly diverting funds received from Nike through a sponsorship deal.

Suspended officials included Athletics Kenya president Isaiah Kiplagat, the association’s vice president and IAAF council member David Okeyo, and Joseph Kinyua, former treasurer of Athletics Kenya.

Njuguna says these allegations tarnish Kenya’s athletic reputation and “diminish our country,” adding, “the image is not good for our country.”

The International Olympic Committee asked Kenya’s Olympic committee, as well as the World Anti-Doping Agency, to ensure an efficient out-of-competition testing program for athletes in all sports.

New Kenyan anti-doping body

In November, the Kenyan government set up a national anti-doping organization and gave it the authority to carry out tests and prosecute cases.

Tuwei said Athletics Kenya does not have the power or capacity to investigate or prosecute, so he is pleased the government set up this new agency.

“And so, we are working very closely, very, very closely with that team and we believe that we are going to make very, very good progress,” he said.

In a statement provided to VOA, the World Anti-Doping Agency said it is assisting with the development of Kenya’s national anti-doping organization, or NADO. It reads, “While progress has been made, there is still a lot of work required. In light of the recent allegations, we need the Kenyan government to ensure that the NADO’s development is expedited and that a full commitment is in place to establish the NADO.”

The agency also said it awaits concrete plans from the government to fund the NADO and finalize the anti-doping rules.

The agency said its officials will attend a meeting in Kenya in February to evaluate the progress that has been made and determine what steps need to be taken next.

Article from