What should the UCI do now?
How about they ask WADA to independently manage the following:
1. Declare a partial amnesty to allow anyone in cycling (not just current riders) to declare any previous involvement in the use, supply, management etc of illegal drugs. Allow a three month period for them to come forward. For timeline purposes, assume this is from 1st December to the end of February. Then, from the first of March, those who came forward would receive a 6 month ban.
2. Within the first three months of the ban (ie 1st March to the end of May), those people would be required to provide statements, under oath, giving chapter and verse regarding what drugs, who they received them from, all other people involved both inside and outside the sport. Failure to provide this information would extend their 6 month ban to, say, a year, or maybe even longer. If they had doped alone, there would be little they could tell about anyone else, but if they had been part of a conspiracy, they would be expected to shop the other people.
3. From 1st June onwards, WADA would review and cross reference the statements. If there is enough evidence from other people’s statements to consider that someone was not fully truthful in their own statements, then their ban could be extended to a year, as if they had refused to testify the details. Also, if the evidence from statements is enough to identify and prosecute people who failed to come forward when they had the chance, then these people (if found guilty) would be subject to a much bigger ban.
I realise that it would be a giant step for someone to come forward who up until now was presumed to be clean. However, if they truly regret starting to take drugs, it is a possible way out. Up until now, the reformed drug users (eg David Millar), have only seen the light since they have been caught. It would be harder for someone who hasn’t yet been caught to offer up evidence against themselves, but they might if the alternative was that someone else came clean and shopped them. That is why someone coming forward of their own accord should be treated much more lightly than someone who is caught. However, those who have been caught should have their bans shortened if they then fully co-operate. I realise that possibly nobody would come forward – well even if they didn’t, we’d be no worse off than now, so still worth a try.
I see this as a possible way to break the Omerta. It would need the clout of legally binding statements, with the risk of perjury charges for lieing. This seems to be very effective in the USA both now, and also within the earlier Marion Jones case. The USA would be able to do it, but some European based teams and riders might just ignore it. I don’t know where WADA are based, and which countries have the strongest legal systems, but all other things being equal, it would probably have most effect if the statements were held under French Law. At least then if someone wanted to stay out of the country to avoid its legal reaches, they would be kept out of the TdF. This would be the most symbolic place to run it. Also, the big teams would have no choice but to ensure their riders co-operated. (Having said that, regardless of the jurisdiction, if someone didn't co-operate with the courts, the UCI could withdraw their licence worldwide).
Edit: Oops. I’ve found a first (of many) flaw in my idea. It’s not just UCI rules that matter. French criminal law regarding drugs would come into it also. Of course the UCI cannot act in isolation.