The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Executive Committee and Foundation Board identified three groups of non-compliant anti-doping organizations in its November 25th Code Compliance Report. Board members voted to delay the official declaration of non-compliant anti-doping organizations until May 2009 (”WADA names ICC, FIVB among non-compliant federations,” November 26).

WADA finally offers some transparency by exposing anti-doping agencies that have failed to comply with the WADA code. WADA’s transparency was criticized after the Beijing Olympics when observers reported that half of the countries failed to comply with “whereabouts” ruling (i.e. Out-of-Competition testing (OOCT)). The Code Compliance report divided non-compliant national anti-doping organizations into three groups based on the nature and degree of non-compliance.

The first group includes those NADOs (or NOCs acting as NADOs) that do not yet have rules in line with the Code but provided WADA with full evidence that they are in the process of adopting rules in line with the revised Code. In many cases, legislative amendments are needed and are the reason of the delay in the process.

The NADOs (or NOCs acting as NADOs) that are included in this group are namely: Argentina, Austria, the French community of Belgium, Chile, Cuba, Cyprus, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Jamaica,

[...]

The second group includes those NADOs (or NOCs acting as NADOs) that do not yet have rules in line with the Code but whose non-compliance can be excused in the light of Code article 23.4.3. In this respect, as already mentioned at chapter 1, the Executive Committee had decided at its meeting of 20 September 2008 that in order to identify the “extraordinary situations” mentioned at Code article 23.4.3 WADA should take into consideration the economic and political situation as well as the sports’ records and history of each country.
The NADOs (or NOCs acting as NADOs) that are included in this group are namely: British Virgin Islands, Gambia, Guam, Haiti, Hong Kong, Kiribati, Liberia, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Micronesia, Nauru, Netherlands Antilles, Palau, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Tuvalu and US Virgin Islands.

[...]

The third group includes those NADOs (or NOCs acting as NADOs) that do not yet have rules in line with the Code and did not provide WADA with full evidence that they are in the process of adopting rules in line with the revised Code. These countries are: Bolivia, Bulgaria, the city of Brussels-Joint Communities Commission1, Israel, Korea (Democratic Republic of), Lithuania, Peru, San Marino and Chinese Taipei.