lN E. AT 
PIC
(LUM l- l-

Fircharc Dound. 0.0.. Ad. 
Member

By E-mail and Courrier

January 3, 2018

Dr. Thomas Bach

President

International Olympic Committee
Chateau de Vidy

2007 La usanne

Switzerland

Dear Thomas,

i would not be discharging my responsibilities as a member of the International Olympic Committee
were I not to share with you my concerns regarding the announced arrangements with respect to Russia
in the wake of the revelations and proof of its systemic and state-sponsored deping, together with its
unprecedented and deliberate attack on the integrity of the 2014 Olympic Winter Games.

AS you know, and perhaps for reasons beyond your control, the IOC members were not consulted, nor
given any opportunity to provide comments, before the announced decisions were taken. Since we do
not know whether any opportunity will be provided for in-depth discussion in the upcoming Session,
writing a letter of this nature is effectively the only manner in which views on the subject can be
communicated.

have shared this letter with my Canadian colleagues and I do not personally intend to circulate it
further, although I do not preclude the possibility that the issues raised in it may well be the subject of
further commentary.

The headline announcing suspension of the Russian NOC was, I thought, a possible good beginning to
eventual resolution ofthe underlying matters, although as I continued to read the fine print, it became
increasingly clear that the actual impact is likely far less than the headline might suggest.

There are several aspects ofthe announced arrangements that I find deeply troubling and that need to
be given additional consideration.

One is that it is now clear that media reports of a "deal? regarding a fine to be paid by Russia, which
were regularly dismissed out of hand by the as mere ?speculation,? were true and that such
negotiations were, in fact, occurring.

While this monetary arrangement could be justified if it were accompanied by other requirements, such
as an acknowledgment by Russia of the doping and manipulations that were taking place, and an
expression and intention to correct the past, there is no present stated requirement by the IOC for
Russia to acknowledge its conduct, nor undertake to ensure that nothing of the nature of what we have
discovered will ever happen again.

There has been no contrition whatsoever expressed on the part of the Russians. Every single decision
and sanction determined by the IOC has been routinely appealed. That is not the level of conduct that
should accompany the magnanimity shown thus far by the IOC.

In my view, this cannot be accepted. It sends the wrong message to athletes and the world at large
concerning the commitment to its stated ethical values. We ntaed to include some additional
features in order to recover the lost ground.

accept the political reality that Russia, as such, will likely never acknowledge, nor apologize for its
actions. That is unfortunate, but hardly surprising. On the other hand, the world at large cannot help
but now be aware ofthe nature and extent of Russian cheating and will make its own judgment

accordingly. And we must accept that the has only very indirect jurisdiction to effectively sanction
Russia as a country.

The IOC does, however, have jurisdiction under the Olympic Charter to sanction the Russian NOC, which
it has done by means of the announced suspension. The IOC also has the jurisdiction to determine the
conditions of lifting that suspension. Those conditions have not, thus far, been stated. The conditions
to he established will, to a significant degree, affect the world?s perception of the commitment to
ethical sport.

suggest that the conditions precedent to reinstatement of the Russian NOC include the following:

- acknowledgment of the Russian activities which have led to the suspension

. apology for the damage done to the Olympic Movement and clean athletes cheated out of their
results

- undertaking to ensure that Russian athletes will now compete in accordance with the Olympic
Charter and the World Anti?Doping Code

6 call for Russian authorities to cease their persecution of the whistleblowers who enabled the
Russian activities to become known

cessation of the appeals to CAS

I acceptance of the lOC?s decisions in respect of disciplinary sanctions arising out of information
provided by the various investigations and reports by the IOC and WADA

The appropriate language for such conditions must be acceptable to the 10C and demonstrate its
concern that athletes and the public be satisfied that the IOC is protecting the rights of clean athletes
and the ethical principles on which the Olympic Movement is based.

In the IOC December announcement, there is a clear indication from the that Russia (having paid the
money] may be permitted to have its ?normal" profile at the Closing Ceremony of the forthcoming
Olympic Winter Games, complete with flags and national uniforms. With respect, for the integrity of
Olympic sport and the Olympic Movement, to allow this without further conditions accepted by the
Russian NOC would be disastrous and tantamount to the Russians thumbing their noses at the IOC and
all clean athletes of the world.

As a member of the IOC, I can only say that I will not participate at the Closing Ceremony under such
circumstances.

At the very least, written acceptance ofthe above-noted conditions for lifting the current suspension of
the Russian NOC must be in place and be made public before any Russian participation in the Closing
Ceremony can occur.

Another concern is that, in the December announcement, far more attention has been focused on
Russian athletes who may be permitted to participate in the upcoming Games than on all the other

athletes who will be there. The overriding point ofany Russian athlete participation is to give those
athletes the opportunity to participate in the Games as clean athletes. it is not to participate

representing a suspended NOC. In the circumstances, there should be minimal focus on the fact that
they are from Russia and, ideally, they should not be identified as Russian athletes. They are individual
athletes, specially invited by the IOC, precisely because their NOC has been adjudged as corrupted.
Unless measures such as those identified above are implemented, Russia should be accorded no profile
whatsoever by the IOC throughout the Games. The IOC should take all steps necessary to minimize such
profile.

To retain its credibility, and that of the Olympic Movement, the IOC must be perceived as, and must act
as, the organization responsible for protecting Olympic values in this case, against outrageous conduct
on the part of Russia and Russian officials.

While was initially encouraged by the announcement, it soon became apparent that the Russians
have not accepted it, nor have they accepted the 10C Commission findings and evidence. Instead, they
blame politics or the whistleblowers (in spite of the fact that the whistleblowers? evidence was

supported by independent evidence and accepted by four independent inquiries). We have seen senior
Russian leadership calling for extradition and even the killing of the "traitor whistleblowers." At every
turn, the Russians have sought to bully, negotiate and litigate solutions.

Foundational ethical policy should not be designed in a souk. As a result of the Russian intransigence, in
spite of overwhelming evidence, there is presently no ethical foundation to this ?deal.? Without such a
foundation, the credibility of the Olympic Movement and leadership by the IOC is severely damaged.
That needs to be changed. The suggestions noted above, and others that may be advanced, can
contribute to recovery of that credibility.

There may still be time to recover at least some of the lost ground and I hope you will give earnest
consideration to accomplishing that goal.

Yours very truly,

.4}ch

Richard W. Pound

c.c. Tricia Smith
Hayley Wickenheiser