T&A, good for everyone?

[BroDeal]

T&R, good for everyone?

I am always up for good T&A, but what would be the result of a cycling T&R?

Does Ricco get to race again?

Does Landis get his Tour win back?

Does Armstrong get his wins back?

Does Bruyneel continue to manage teams?

Does Dr. Ferrari get to coach riders?

 

[martinvickers]

I am always up for good T&A, but would would the result of a cycling version be?

Does Ricco get to race again?

No, for his own bloody safety.

Does Landis get his Tour win back?

No. The sh!t he did to lemond rules that out. If he makes some go away money from the lawsuit, fair enough.

Does Armstrong get his wins back?

He'll be damn lucky to keep his liberty, never mind his titles. Willing to compromise just a little on that if he spills completely a.la. statute of limitations

Does Bruyneel continue to manage teams?

No. Direct to Jail. Do not pass Go. Do not collect £200

Does Dr. Ferrari get to coach riders?

Dr. Ferrari gets a nice prison cell with a friendly biker with needs.

And yes, that means I loathe Bruyneel and Ferrari even more than Armstrong - at least Armstrong was risking his own health, as wll as everyone elses, and broke no hypocratic oath.

 

[enCYCLOpedia]

That's not the way an amnesty works in such a situation. If you've already been caught, you don't benefit form it. Only if you confess to something that has not yet been found out, you can expect amnesty in return (provided that you don't reoffend - if you do, your previous violations still count against you).

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

I am always up for good T&A, but would would the result of a cycling version be?

Does Ricco get to race again?

Does Landis get his Tour win back?

Does Armstrong get his wins back?

Does Bruyneel continue to manage teams?

Does Dr. Ferrari get to coach riders?

No, with T & R, amnesty is only given in return for full disclosure about yourself and the activities of others.

So for example Eugene De Kock who was part of a death squad during the Apartheid era did confess and named others, but he still received 212 years in jail.

The point is that you still have to punish the offenders. This is one of the key non-negotiables if the process is to have any credibility for the victims and the wider population. So for example, there is no point in letting Dertie Cont, or Wiggins fess up and then receive no punishment for their past crimes. They may receive a reduced ban in return for their confession.

The point is that the incentive to confess is that if they don't then they receive a more severe punishment.

Punishment is for the most part aimed at the most senior actors in the process. So McQuaid, Hog, etc would receive a greater level of punishment than say a neo-pro who was doing what he was told.

The worse case is the 'Spanish solution' which is amnesty and amnesia, which is where no one gets punished apart from those who want to investigate the crimes of the past.

Generally, places that have had more rigorous transitional justice have been more successful post transition than those that haven't.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I saw "T&A" and came in here looking for something I have not found yet. Really disappointed.

 

[Benotti69]

No, with T & R, amnesty is only given in return for full disclosure about yourself and the activities of others.

So for example Eugene De Kock who was part of a death squad during the Apartheid era did confess and named others, but he still received 212 years in jail.

The point is that you still have to punish the offenders. This is one of the key non-negotiables if the process is to have any credibility for the victims and the wider population. So for example, there is no point in letting Dertie Cont, or Wiggins fess up and then receive no punishment for their past crimes. They may receive a reduced ban in return for their confession.

The point is that the incentive to confess is that if they don't then they receive a more severe punishment.

Punishment is for the most part aimed at the most senior actors in the process. So McQuaid, Hog, etc would receive a greater level of punishment than say a neo-pro who was doing what he was told.

The worse case is the 'Spanish solution' which is amnesty and amnesia, which is where no one gets punished apart from those who want to investigate the crimes of the past.

Generally, places that have had more rigorous transitional justice have been more successful post transition than those that haven't.

It will be a very small peloton if all participated who sinned.

I saw "T&A" and came in here looking for something I have not found yet. Really disappointed.

Try the yellow rose, must be cheaper rates now their #1 client is on the run.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

It will be a very small peloton if all participated who sinned.

Yes, this is one of the arguments against TJ - and this is why you have a clear, transparent process of establishing the truth. The 'truth' part of T & R enables the reconciliation aspect. It enables you to see clearly who are the instigators and the drivers of the abusive period, it also allows you to work out who were swept up in the tide.

Armstrong still gets a life ban, but some guy who never made it and doped because he feared for his job gets a lesser sentence.

You punish everyone who sinned, but the degree of punishment depends on the crime, the degree of remorse and the extent of the confession.

Would a small peloton necessarily be a bad thing if it is a peloton free from the likes of Riis, Zabel, Brailsford, Ferrari, Armstrong, Wiggins, Frodo?

 

[Dazed and Confused]

It took 18 months or so to nail Contador after a positive test. After 6 months the Luxembourg fed is still trying to decide about Schleck's positive. A T&A process would never work in cycling. We will have people dying of old age getting it done.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

It took 18 months or so to nail Contador after a positive test. After 6 months the Luxembourg fed is still trying to decide about Schleck's positive. A T&A process would never work in cycling. We will have people dying of old age getting it done.

Not necessarily true.

Contador took 18 months because the Spanish fed, the UCI etc all slowed the process down to enable their golden boy to race.

A successful T & R requires funding and a desire to uncover the past.

On a different scale this is the resources the South African state deployed post-apartheid

For anyone who is interested - it might help to clarify some of the confusion about what T & R entails and the extent that T & R has to cover:

TRC had its own investigative unit & witness protection scheme. ie separate from the authorities - in the case of cycling it would be from outside cycling

AC considered amnesty applications. To qualify two preconditions required: the crime had to be associated with a political objective and to give full disclosure.

Applied to members of political organizations, liberation movements or state security forces. Had to be engaged in the struggle or countering resistance.

If eligible for amnesty the motive, nature and context of the act was considered. Anyone acting for personal gain didn’t qualify for amnesty, except if they received money or anything of value for being an informer.

Crimes motivated by personal malice, ill will or spite not granted amnesty. If the crime violated human rights a public hearing had to be conducted .

Once granted any record of the conviction was expunged. The persons name and information about the act was published in the Govt Gazette.

R&R made policy recommendations on restoring the dignity of victims.

Investigative Unit consisted of 60 investigators from the police, legal profession & human rights organizations. Plus 12 investigators from foreign police forces.

Carried out investigations, subpoenaed & questioned those appearing before the TRC. Had authority to seize or retain any evidence or objects relevant to the investigation. Had a Witness Protection Programme to protect those who wished to testify and were in danger.150+ witnesses joined the program

Held 120+ hearings throughout SA, c4,000 victims testified.

Addressed accountability for human rights abuse more broadly by examining the roles played by professions and institutions in resisting or facilitating human rights abuse. Held hearings on the role of the medical & legal professions under apartheid and focused national attention on professional codes of conduct.

Supervised the collection of 22,000+ victim statements.

Supervised the gathering of evidence on violations of human rights. Helped uncover the fate of hundreds of victims whose deaths and disappearances had remained mysteries. Identified patterns of abuse such as the widespread torture of detainees held without trial. As a result of the disclosures made in amnesty applications, the identities of those responsible for hundreds of deaths have now been revealed.

####

In essence for T & R to work - it has to be far reaching, it has to have a clear framework established for punishment, it has to have clearly defined goals both physically and also ideologically. It also has to be well funded and well organized. T & R is much more than a confessional hearing on TV where the accused is wheeled out, confesses to a few things, gets punished and is never seen or heard of again and everyone goes back to how it was before.

 

[blackcat]

T&A?

the Yellow Rose variety? B grade exploitation films, male gaze, visual attraction in narrative cinema, or truth and amnesty?

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Not necessarily true.

Contador took 18 months because the Spanish fed, the UCI etc all slowed the process down to enable their golden boy to race.

A successful T & R requires funding and a desire to uncover the past.

On a different scale this is the resources the South African state deployed post-apartheid

For anyone who is interested - it might help to clarify some of the confusion about what T & R entails and the extent that T & R has to cover:

TRC had its own investigative unit & witness protection scheme. ie separate from the authorities - in the case of cycling it would be from outside cycling

AC considered amnesty applications. To qualify two preconditions required: the crime had to be associated with a political objective and to give full disclosure.

Applied to members of political organizations, liberation movements or state security forces. Had to be engaged in the struggle or countering resistance.

If eligible for amnesty the motive, nature and context of the act was considered. Anyone acting for personal gain didn’t qualify for amnesty, except if they received money or anything of value for being an informer.

Crimes motivated by personal malice, ill will or spite not granted amnesty. If the crime violated human rights a public hearing had to be conducted .

Once granted any record of the conviction was expunged. The persons name and information about the act was published in the Govt Gazette.

R&R made policy recommendations on restoring the dignity of victims.

Investigative Unit consisted of 60 investigators from the police, legal profession & human rights organizations. Plus 12 investigators from foreign police forces.

Carried out investigations, subpoenaed & questioned those appearing before the TRC. Had authority to seize or retain any evidence or objects relevant to the investigation. Had a Witness Protection Programme to protect those who wished to testify and were in danger.150+ witnesses joined the program

Held 120+ hearings throughout SA, c4,000 victims testified.

Addressed accountability for human rights abuse more broadly by examining the roles played by professions and institutions in resisting or facilitating human rights abuse. Held hearings on the role of the medical & legal professions under apartheid and focused national attention on professional codes of conduct.

Supervised the collection of 22,000+ victim statements.

Supervised the gathering of evidence on violations of human rights. Helped uncover the fate of hundreds of victims whose deaths and disappearances had remained mysteries. Identified patterns of abuse such as the widespread torture of detainees held without trial. As a result of the disclosures made in amnesty applications, the identities of those responsible for hundreds of deaths have now been revealed.

Can't compare the situation imo.

Apartheid ended officially at a specific date with a majority vote. This provided executive powers and significant funding for the T&R within the "framework" of a single nation.

Just trying to find the money and setting up the "panel" will take years in cycling. Just my opinion, and I wish everybody good luck getting it done.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

T & R was actually agreed upon before the elections. It is in the post-amble to the interim constitution, but its full agreement was very late in the day.

I think you can and you should because T & R when it is invoked draws specifically on the South African experience. Also, if those who speak of the need for T & R in cycling are serious about it then they have to be willing to commit resources to its successful execution.

My view is that when McQuaid and others involved in cycling (especially the media) talk about T & R, they don't really know what they are talking about. They seem to think it is just about televised court hearings which it isn't.

As I mentioned, it is also about reshaping the culture.

Acknowledgment crucial as actors must not only recognize the existence of abuse, but its wrongfulness. The argument being that once admitted the moral space that allowed it to occur is narrowed. Knowing the truth and building consensus that they are illegitimate is vital in preventing their recurrence.

This last point is why the media would also need to be subject to any T & R into doping in cycling. Doping isn't just about the needle in the ****, its also about the doctor, the manager, the administrator the sponsor and the journalist who lies for you, who refuses to look too hard.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

T & R was actually agreed upon before the elections. It is in the post-amble to the interim constitution, but its full agreement was very late in the day.

Must have been lots of groundwork for sure, but in the end saying no to De Klerk was the clear mandate.

Cut off date, powers and funding. Thats what we need to get things done on a grand scale in cycling if a T&A/R was to successfully happen. Can't even see the beginning myself. Final word from me.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

I think that there were four steps - but certainly it was part of the exit from the old regime.

1) Govt and security forces refused to agree to elections if its members, supporters or operatives could be arrested, prosecuted and imprisoned.

2) Amnesty was the last obstacle to transition. Police commanders warned the ANC that they wouldn’t support or safeguard the electoral process if it led to the establishment of a govt that intended to prosecute and imprison members of the police.

3) ANC had a dilemma. Without an amnesty agreement, negotiations would collapse and the politics of confrontation would return. Also opposition from the security forces would make successful elections impossible

4) Postamble was a legally binding promise made at the negotiating table that South Africa’s first democratic govt would grant amnesty to those who had committed political crimes.

The Govt and security forces were reassured that if they handed over power, they would not be automatically prosecuted.

For the ANC it was acceptable because: The apartheid regime wasn’t granting itself amnesty. ANC believed that only a new legitimate order had the right to forgive the crimes of the old regime. It permitted the new govt to grant amnesty according to a set of objective criteria and preconditions, such as full disclosure of the crimes or the acknowledgement that a crime was politically motivated.

I think though that this also shows the main stumbling block. T & R can not take place under the current regime. There is no way that McQuaid or the UCI in its present form could legitimately run a T & R. This is the same as allowing De Klerk or P.W.Botha to run the process.

Until the UCI is swept away there can not be T & R.

NB as I recall neither De Klerk or Botha testified at T & R and this was considered to be one of its major failures. Any T & R in cycling needs to have the power to compel witnesses to speak, this is especially the case in cycling where omerta is one of the major stumbling blocks to reform.

 

[weeniebeenie]

In order for a Truth & Reconciliation (T&R) process to work I think it needs to be extremely lenient and run along the lines below in order to encourage riders to come forward.

1. The T&R process needs to be run by a commission that is independent from the UCI (ideally appointed by WADA).

2. The commission needs to set a deadline by which people involved in cycling (riders, DS’s etc) register to take part in the T&R hearing process.

3. People that take part in the T&R hearings and provide information about their doping activities will be given a much shorter sanction (e.g. a 6 month ban) that would normally be applied. This would be conditional on them providing full disclosure on their activities (whether doping was approved by their team, information on suppliers etc). This would obviously need sign off from WADA, UCI and national organisations before any hearings take place.

4. People that don’t take part in the T&R process and who are subsequently have found to have doped / been involved in doping (either through evidence presented to the T&R commission or subsequent revelations) will be banned for a much longer period than is currently normal (e.g. 8 years). This also applies to people that took part in the T&R process but are subsequently found to have lied.

5. Existing bans still apply (e.g. Armstrong, Ricco, Ferrari). However, people who are not serving lifetime bans should have the opportunity to testify at the hearings without additional sanctions being applied (or perhaps just a 6 month extension). If people are feeling generous then you could allow lifetime bans to be reduced to 8 years in the event of a full confession (still a career ban ending in most cases).

6. People who have been previously banned should have the opportunity to testify at the hearings without receiving lifetime ban for a second offence. An admission of a new doping offence would result in a shortened ban (e.g. 6 months), while an admission in relation to their previous offence (e.g. someone admitting that their positive test was not actually the result of ingesting a contaminated product or someone providing additional information on who supplied them) would not result in an additional sanction.

7. All teams must agree (prior to the hearings) to honour the contracts of anyone that takes part in the T&R process (even if they are subject to a ban).

8. All race organisers must agree (prior to the hearings) not to try and reclaim winnings from anyone that takes part in the T&R process. Results lost to doping should not be reallocated.

9. Bans for doping offences are increased significantly (e.g. to 8 years) following the end of the T&R process. The aim being to demonstrate that while the slate may have been wiped clean, new infractions will not be tolerated.

I should point out that the above is just the result of 5 minutes thought and are just suggestions to try and start a debate on how a T&R process could work. There are probably huge issues that I have missed or not thought about properly.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

I think you would have to offer Armstrong, Ricco etc some kind of incentive to testify.

Armstrong's Oprah interview shows the problem with 'confession TV' what happens when the person is still lying. If this were the case, then there would be no reduction in sanction.

 

[sniper]

...

Until the UCI is swept away there can not be T & R.

this.

the order of events should be: 1. UCI out, 2. T&R.

the other way around is not gonna work. UCI will only use it as a shield (like the biopassport) to point out how they're leading the fight against doping.

on his twitter, vaughters is all over the place applauding the UCI-IC for pushing for the T&R, as if that would make everything ok again.

 

[sniper]

if a T&R would start tomorrow, we'd see a whole lot of half confessions and pseudo-admissions.
See Lance's interview, or the USADA affidavits, for a couple of excellent cases in point.

"truth" as a concept has no place in cycling.
"perception is reality" is a more fruitful concept.

 

[ElChingon]

T & R?

Some will have a reason to admit, some will still have a reason not to or to at least come up short of the truth.

It will end up being more like

Half Truths and Beneficial's.

Who ever wants T & R probably also is still waiting for Santa Claus.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Well quite - this is the problem - at the moment doping officially stopped in 2006....