KINGSTON, Jamaica– Lawyers representing West Indies batsman, John Campbell, said the cricketer would decide soon on whether to appeal a four-year ban imposed by the Jamaica Anti-Doping Commission (JADCO) for an anti-doping violation.
The In a statement, Jamaican law firm, Nunes Scholefield Deleon & Co, said it was “very disappointed” with the ruling of JADCO’s three-member independent disciplinary panel.
The 29-year-old Campbell, who has played 20 Tests, six ODIs, and two T20Is for West Indies, had been accused by JADCO of “evading, refusing or failing to submit to sample collection,” based on his refusal to provide a blood sample at his home in Kingston in April.
“We have read the written decision of the disciplinary panel and believe that there are legitimate grounds for an appeal concerning whether the necessary ingredients to sustain the alleged anti-doping rule violation were proved before the panel, particularly as it relates to the notification requirements,” the lawyers for the Jamaican said.
“Mr. Campbell’s position was that JADCO did not properly notify him. There were several breaches by JADCO of the mandatory International Standards for Testing and Investigations in respect of the notification of the athlete, which, in our view, were not adequately addressed by the panel.”
Additionally, the legal team said there were several mitigatory factors supported by evidence not challenged by JADCO and which ought to have militated against the imposition of the maximum penalty, even if the panel found that the athlete committed a violation.
“It does not appear from the written decision that the panel adequately considered these factors in mitigation. Our client will, therefore, at this time, consider exercising his right of appeal after further consultation with his legal team and will make a decision shortly,” Nunes Scholefield Deleon & Co said.
The statement from the lawyers insisted that Campbell has been a clean athlete throughout his career as a batsman and remained committed to clean sport.
They emphasized that the allegation against their client was not one relating to an adverse analytical finding for banned substances but the assertion that he refused or failed to submit to sample collection after proper notification under the JADCO Anti-Doping Rules.
“Our client has, to date, never returned an adverse analytical finding for banned substances,” the law firm stressed.
The ban imposed on Campbell on October 7 has been backdated to start from May 10, the date of the violation notification.
and then 
