Attorneys representing Jamaican squash player Julian Morrison have filed a formal application requesting that Catherine Minto, Chair of the Independent Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel, recuse herself from the ongoing hearing concerning an alleged anti-doping violation. The application, filed by Dr. Emir Crowne, Mr. Matthew Gayle, and Mr. Sayeed Bernard, on Monday, September 2, argues that Minto’s prior extensive working relationship with Kings Counsel Ian Wilkinson, who is representing the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) in the matter, presents a potential conflict of interest.

The legal team’s concerns are rooted in the principle of impartiality, as outlined in WADA’s International Standard for Results Management. This standard mandates that members of hearing panels must be free from any actual or potential conflicts of interest to ensure a fair and unbiased adjudication process.

According to the standard, “Upon appointment to a hearing panel, each hearing panel member shall sign a declaration that there are no facts or circumstances known to him/her which might call into question their impartiality in the eyes of any of the parties, other than any circumstances disclosed in the declaration…”

Morrison's legal team discovered on August 30, 2024, that Minto had previously served as co-counsel with Wilkinson in several cases, some of which spanned nearly a decade and culminated in an appeal to the Privy Council. Despite the significant duration and nature of this professional relationship, it was not disclosed to Morrison or his representatives at the outset of the hearing. They argue that this omission compromises the perceived impartiality of the Chair and raises questions about the fairness of the proceedings.

Matthew Gayle, one of Morrison’s attorneys, emphasized the seriousness of the situation: “Given that the panel has considered the issue of recusal, substantively for a significant period of time, this ought to have been a matter that was disclosed to the parties so the athlete has no way of knowing but for information in the public domain. This should have been disclosed by the Chair herself and to the parties and give the athlete an opportunity to consider whether or not he wants to raise an objection, and in the circumstances where no disclosure has taken place it does raise a very serious question as to why,” he told Sportsmax.TV.

The application highlights multiple cases, including ones from 2014, 2016, and 2020, where Minto and Wilkinson worked closely together. Morrison’s legal team contends that this omission violates the ethical guidelines that require transparency and impartiality from those presiding over such hearings.

In April, Morrison was provisionally suspended by JADCO after testing positive for trace amounts of the banned anabolic agent Boldenone. Since then, he has been eagerly awaiting the chance to clear his name. His legal team has argued that Morrison unknowingly ingested the substance and is determined to prove his innocence.

The attorneys have requested that Minto either voluntarily recuse herself and be replaced by an alternate who has no recent or extensive professional ties to JADCO's counsel, or that the application for her recusal be decided by other members of the Independent Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel who are free from similar conflicts.

Morrison’s legal team stressed that this application was not made lightly, acknowledging that it could delay the proceedings. However, they assert that the integrity of the hearing and the athlete’s right to a fair trial must take precedence.

The outcome of this recusal application could significantly impact the course of the hearing, as both parties await a decision that will determine the next steps in this high-stakes case. Morrison remains resolute in his fight to prove his innocence and is hopeful that he will be granted a fair opportunity to do so.

The legal battle surrounding Jamaican squash player Julian Morrison has taken a contentious turn as his attorneys, Matthew Gayle and Dr. Emir Crowne of New City Chambers, are at odds with the Independent Anti-Doping Panel (IADP) over its decision to hold the upcoming hearing virtually. The dispute arose after Morrison’s legal team, who had planned to attend the hearing in person, was informed at the last minute that the proceedings set for September 3 and 4, would be conducted via Zoom.

Morrison, who was provisionally suspended by the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) in April after testing positive for trace amounts of the banned anabolic agent Boldenone, has been eagerly awaiting the chance to clear his name. His legal team has argued that Morrison unknowingly ingested the substance and is determined to prove his innocence.

Matthew Gayle expressed his frustration with the IADP’s unilateral decision to conduct the hearing virtually, especially given the substantial expenses incurred by the athlete for his legal team to travel to Jamaica.

“My personal opinion is that the unilateral decision by the Independent Panel to hold this hearing, a substantive hearing by virtual means, made at the 11th hour, and without any consultation with the parties, offends every sense of justice of the matter," Gayle said. "In particular, Dr. Crowne and I indicated that we were in the midst of making travel arrangements some two weeks ago, and this was communicated to the panel."

He continued, “Since then, the athlete has expended significant funds for us to travel to Jamaica in order to represent him in person, only to find out less than a week before we travel that the hearing is to be held by Zoom. This is in the context of there has been very little, if any, movement in bringing this matter to a head since April. It reeks of bureaucratic inefficiency. I just hope that the athlete is able to get a fair hearing. At the end of the day, this athlete has been on provisional suspension for a significant period, and the case is yet to be heard, yet to be proven.”

The situation escalated further when Sportsmax.TV obtained copies of the correspondence between Morrison’s representatives and Christine Minto, chairperson of the IADP. In the emails, Morrison’s legal team expressed their surprise and disappointment at the decision to hold the hearing virtually, especially after making it clear on multiple occasions that they intended to be present in Jamaica for the hearing.

“We are very surprised to learn that the choice of online forum for the hearing is on account of the athlete's representatives living/working out of the country. The experts appearing virtually is also a surprising rationale, since by that account there would rarely be an in-person hearing," the correspondence read.

The attorneys emphasized that their plans to attend in person had been communicated clearly, both verbally and in writing, yet the decision to go virtual was made without their input.

 In response, Minto defended the Panel’s decision, stating that the hearing had been conducted virtually from the start and that it should not have been unexpected that it would continue in the same manner. She pointed out that the athlete’s representatives did not specifically request an in-person hearing early enough and suggested that their decision to book accommodations in Jamaica was based on their preference to be in the same room as their client during the virtual hearing.

“This matter has been conducted virtually since the commencement of the hearing process. We have had at least four hearing dates so far, virtually. Therefore, it ought not to have taken anyone by surprise that the hearing will be continuing and concluding virtually," Minto explained.

She added, "A specific application ought to have been made for an in-person hearing by the athlete. Perhaps at the same time, as the application for a public hearing. It was certainly neither clear to us nor unequivocal that the athlete desired an in-person hearing. Further, the importance of the athlete’s evidence is not diminished or undermined if it is taken virtually.”

As the dispute over the hearing format continues, the focus remains on ensuring that Julian Morrison receives a fair trial and that the case, which has been pending for several months, reaches a timely conclusion.

Attorneys for Jamaica’s hammer thrower Nayoka Clunis have followed through on their promise, and have filed an urgent appeal with the Court of Arbitration for Sport’s (CAS) Ad Hoc Division to seek a resolution regarding the athlete’s Olympic Games omission.

As a result of the application, the Jamaica Athletics Administrative Association (JAAA) has once again been given a deadline to respond.

In accordance with Article 15 lit b. of the CAS Ad Hoc rules, the JAAA, as the Respondent, has until Friday, July 19, at 6:00pm Paris time (11:00am Jamaica time) to file a reply to Clunis’ application.

World Athletics, Jamaica Olympic Association (JOA) and the International Olympic Committee were also listed as “Interested Parties” in the issue.

“Within the same timeline, the interested Parties are entitled to file a written submission if they wish to do so. Upon receipt of the written submissions of the Respondent and interested Parties, the panel will decide shortly after whether to hold a hearing,” the CAS Ad Hoc rules stated.

It is unclear what the outcome would be if the JAAA or the Interested Parties fail to respond.

Prior to filing the application, Clunis’ representatives, Sayeed Bernard and Emir Crowne, wrote to the JAAA and the JOA on Wednesday seeking an update about Clunis’ Olympic team status by 5:00pm, but their deadline was not met.

The issue stems from the fact that Clunis, who achieved a National Record of 71.83 metres in May, to be ranked in the top 32 in the world this year, was initially named to the JAAA’s athletics team for the Paris Olympics.

However, the 28-year-old’s dream of competing on the world’s biggest stage is now hanging in the balance due to a blunder from the JAAA, as her name was later omitted from the JAAA’s official list submitted to World Athletics.

“Following the Jamaican Olympic Trials, I was elated to receive notification of my official selection to Team Jamaica. Unfortunately, I have since found myself in a difficult position. Due to an omission made by the Jamaican Athletics Administration Association, my name was not officially submitted to World Athletics. As such, I do not have a position in the Olympic Games,” Clunis shared in a post on X, formerly Twitter.

CAS’s Ad Hoc Division deals with the arbitration of disputes that arise regarding major sporting events and usually decides within 48 hours.

Attorneys representing Jamaica’s hammer thrower Nayoka Clunis are set to file an urgent appeal before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ad hoc committee if the uncertainty surrounding her participation in the 2024 Olympic Games remains unresolved by 5 pm today, Wednesday, July 16.

Despite achieving a National Record of 71.83 metres in May, ranking her in the top 32 in the world this year, Clunis's dream of competing on the world’s biggest stage is now hanging in the balance due to a blunder from the Jamaica Athletics Administrative Association (JAAA).

The 28-year-old, who placed second at the JAAA National Senior Championships, initially believed she was on her way to the Olympics. However, her excitement turned to dismay when she learned that her name was omitted from the JAAA’s official list submitted to World Athletics.

“Following the Jamaican Olympic Trials, I was elated to receive notification of my official selection to Team Jamaica. Unfortunately, I have since found myself in a difficult position. Due to an omission made by the Jamaican Athletics Administration Association, my name was not officially submitted to World Athletics. As such, I do not have a position in the Olympic Games,” Clunis shared in a post on X, formerly Twitter.

However, after no word forthcoming from the JAAA, attorneys representing the frustrated athlete - Dr. Emir Crowne and local attorney Sayeed Bernard – have written to the JAAA informing of their intended action.

"Mr. Bernard and I act for Ms. Nayoka Clunis, an athlete who should be well-known to you by now. As is also common ground, the JAAA’s admitted negligence (gross negligence, in some jurisdictions) has put Ms. Clunis’ Olympic dreams in jeopardy. In the absence of any updates as to Ms. Clunis’ situation by 5 p.m. today, we have been instructed to file an emergency appeal to the CAS’s ad hoc division."

The letter continued, "Indeed, we are hopeful that an appeal to the CAS is not necessary, but the JAAA’s negligence and radio silence since July 7th has left our client with few options, not to mention the irreparable damage this has done to the mental and emotional well-being. Athletes deserve better."

While Clunis awaits a resolution, her plight underscores the importance of strong administrative leadership, as the oversight by the JAAA could potentially rob an athlete who has shown remarkable dedication in her sport of the opportunity to achieve her dream on the global stage.

Noted sports attorney Dr. Emir Crowne, along with Matthew Gayle, Jason Jones, and Sayeed Bernard, have stepped up to represent Jamaican judo athlete Ebony Drysdale-Daley amidst a heated dispute with the Jamaica Judo Association (JJA). The association, led by Dwayne Barnett, has recently accused the British-born judoka of having two whereabouts failures and being on the brink of a ban, a move that Dr Crowne has vehemently criticized.

Dr. Crowne, an international sports lawyer with a history of defending athletes in high-profile cases, blasted the JJA for what he describes as a "smear campaign" against Drysdale-Daley. He expressed outrage over the JJA's decision to publicly disclose confidential information about Drysdale-Daley's whereabouts failures in a press release, calling it "absolutely atrocious" and "wildly irresponsible."

“The Jamaican Judo Association’s action to disclose such confidential information is absolutely atrocious. Athletes enjoy the protection of confidentiality until there is actually some sort of anti-doping rule violation asserted against them,” Crowne explained. He pointed out that an anti-doping rule violation only occurs after three whereabouts failures within a 12-month period, making the JJA's disclosure premature and unethical.

The JJA's press release came as a response to a video posted by Drysdale-Daley, in which she accused the association of bias in selecting athletes for the Paris Olympic Games. Drysdale-Daley, who made history as Jamaica's first judoka at the Olympic Games in Tokyo 2021, alleged that her attempts to qualify for the upcoming Olympics were being deliberately hindered by the JJA in favour of her male counterpart, Ashley McKenzie.

“I feel the federation has shown no impartiality. There is a real question of ethics and integrity. The Jamaican Judo Association is blocking me from attending and competing in my last qualifying event, an event that I have self-funded and paid for,” Drysdale-Daley said in her video.

The JJA, in its defence, cited Drysdale-Daley’s failure to meet deadlines and her previous conduct at the Commonwealth Games 2022, which they described as "unbecoming of an athlete."

In response, Dr. Crowne called for the Jamaican Olympic Association (JOA), the International Judo Federation (IJF), and the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) to investigate the JJA's conduct. “I encourage JADCO, I encourage WADA, I encourage the JOA, I encourage the international federation to take a hard look at this press release and see if it was appropriate to disclose what is otherwise completely confidential,” Crowne asserted.

Dr. Crowne, known for his representation of athletes like Jamaica’s Ryker Hylton and Briana Williams, argued that the JJA's actions have damaged its own reputation more than Drysdale-Daley's. “In attempting to paint the athlete in a negative light, the Jamaican Judo Association has now painted themselves in a negative light through this breach of confidence, and it should not go unpunished,” he declared.

The disciplinary process for Drysdale-Daley, who has already received a notice of suspension from the JJA, remains in flux. With Dr Crowne and his team offering their legal expertise, the battle between Drysdale-Daley and the JJA is poised to intensify, drawing significant attention from the sports community as the saga unfolds.

Noted sports attorney Dr. Emir Crowne has blasted the Dwayne Barnett-led Jamaican Judo Association (JJA) for what he described as a smear campaign against British-born judoka Ebony Drysdale-Daley, as the sporting body, on Thursday, revealed that the athlete has two whereabouts failures and is on the cusp of being banned.

Crowne, an international sports lawyer, labelled the JJA’s action to disclose such confidential information in a press release as “absolutely atrocious,” and “wildly irresponsible,” as he believes the breach should not go unpunished.

The JJA’s release, which stated in part that Drysdale-Daley “has twice failed to present herself for Anti-doping testing and faces a potential ban if another test is missed,” was a response to the athlete’s widely-circulated video in which she accused the association of bias where selection for this summer’s Paris Olympic Games is concerned.

Drysdale-Daley, 29, who became the country’s first athlete to compete in judo at an Olympic Games, when she graced the 2021 Tokyo edition, has since been given a notice of suspension by the association, a copy of which SportsMax.TV has obtained.

“Somehow the Jamaican Judo association thought it appropriate to publicly disclose that the athlete has two whereabouts failures so far. I say wildly irresponsible because athletes enjoy the protection of confidentiality until there is actually some sort of anti-doping rule violation asserted against them. For whereabouts failures, there is no anti-doping rule violation until there is three whereabouts failures in a twelve-month period. So until that happens, there is no anti-doping rule violation,” Crowne explained.