WADA will launch an independent review after agreeing that a Chinese swimmer mistakenly ingested banned drugs

The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) was recently revealed by the media that in 2021, the agency agreed with China’s investigation results that 23 Chinese swimmers found banned substances in their bodies due to "accidental ingestion", allowing the athletes to swim in Tokyo Participating in the Olympics caused controversy in public opinion. The World Anti-Doping Agency announced on Thursday that it would launch an independent review of the case.

The New York Times and other media reported last week that a few months before the Tokyo Olympics in July 2021, 23 Chinese swimmers were found to contain the heart drug trimetazidine (TMZ) in their bodies. However, an investigation by the China Anti-Doping Center (CHINADA) determined that athletes accidentally consumed food contaminated with trimetazidine at a party from the end of 2020 to the beginning of 2021. The World Anti-Doping Agency agreed with the findings, allowing These players were able to compete.

Witold Bańka , President of the World Anti-Doping Agency, said in a press release on Thursday: "WADA 's integrity and reputation are under attack. In the past few days, WADA has been unfairly accused of failing to bring this case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. ( Court of Arbitration for Sport ) appeals in favor of China. ”

Banka stressed that WADA continues to reject these false accusations and "we are pleased to put these matters in the hands of an experienced, respected and independent prosecutor."

It is reported that this review will be led by Eric Cottier, who has 39 years of experience as a prosecutor and was the former prosecutor general of Canton de Vaud, Switzerland. He will be given full authority to review all files related to this case. with files. Relevant work will start in the next few days, and the results are expected to be published within two months.

The World Anti-Doping Agency said that Cotier will express his views on two issues, including whether there are any signs of favoring China, improper interference or other inappropriate behavior in this case, and whether the World Anti-Doping Agency recognizes China’s decision on the investigation results of this case. Reasonable.