THE DECISION by the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) to appeal the 'acquittal' by a disciplinary panel of the five athletes accused of taking a banned substance is unlikely to have been greeted with popular approval in Jamaica.

The prevailing view, we expect, is that JADCO, by its action, is playing into the hands of, or acquiescing to, those international forces that have maintained a whispering campaign against Jamaican athletes, particularly since this country's heroics at the Beijing Olympics. Indeed, there was a certain sense of "we got you" when it was announced that the Jamaicans - Marvin Anderson, Allodin Fothergill, Lansford Spence and Yohan Blake - had tested positive at the June athletics trials.

The problem for those critics is fathoming how a small, poor country like Jamaica has emerged into a global athletic power, as though the phenomena of Usain Bolt et al have just happened. The bald fact is that Jamaica has been an athletic power for 50 years.

But the national peeve over such attitudes notwithstanding, this newspaper insists not only on the right to pursue the course upon which JADCO has embarked, but believe that, in the long run, the action could well be in the interest of Jamaican athletics.

First concern

Our first concern is that JADCO proceed in accordance with the law; that its action stands on a firm legal foundation.

Second, JADCO must be convinced that its action is in pursuance of natural justice in its broadest sense, which means a concern not only for the impact of the accused athletes, but all stakeholders in the process. The anti-doping regulations, and Jamaica's subscription to them, are in part a declaration of our belief in the nobility of the sport and recreation and our expectation of a commitment to these high ideals and fairness by all who compete. So, those who breach the compact, Jamaican or otherwise, are to be sanctioned.

The fact is, though, that there are some, by whatever ill-conceived logic they arrive at such positions, who doubt our capacity to stand by such principles. In this construct, Beijing could not have been on the basis of talent and skilful preparation with the help of gifted and learned coaches. They presume that our premier athletes had the aid of banned substances.

That our athletes were tested at national championship and were returned with "adverse analytical findings" is a vindication of Jamaica's commitment to fair play and adherence to the rules in global athletics.

Important process

This week's hearings in which the independent disciplinary panel determined, in one case, that the JADCO had not followed the rules with regard to the test of a 'B' sample and that "no anti-doping rule violation occurred" with the regard to the others was a victory for due process. The JADCO appeal is a continuation of this process, which we believe is of particular importance.

First, we start from the premise that JADCO is doing this because it is convinced of the correctness of its action and not merely in search of kudos from Jamaica's critics. That presumption means that what matters is not that Jamaican athletes are involved, but a higher principle of what is right.

The timing of these developments is unfortunate but, as we see it, is a triumph of principle over opportunism.

The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.