WADA may need a public interest test in anti-doping decisions

What the study found: The authors argue that the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) is sufficiently public in nature that it should use a public interest test when making discretionary decisions.
Why the authors say this matters: The study suggests that embedding a public interest test could require WADA decision-makers to explain their actions against a common standard, which the authors say would support greater consistency and procedural justice in anti-doping processes.
What the researchers tested: The article examines WADA as a hybrid public-private organisation and uses a holistic understanding of “publicness” drawn from the work of Kinsgbury, Armin von Bogdandy and colleagues, and Letitia Lo Giacco. It identifies WADA’s current roles, discretionary decision-making situations in the World Anti-Doping Code, and uses case studies to illustrate how a public interest test would affect decisions.
What worked and what didn't: The paper’s main claim is that WADA should incorporate a public interest consideration. It also states that earlier anti-doping literature focused mainly on WADA’s structure, predates several International Standards, and does not reflect WADA’s evolving role in areas such as education.
What to keep in mind: The abstract does not report empirical test results or provide detailed limitations. The paper presents an argument and illustrative case studies rather than a summary of measured outcomes.

Key points

• The authors argue that WADA is sufficiently public to require a public interest test.
• They say a public interest test could make WADA decision-making more consistent and more procedurally just.
• The article analyzes WADA’s discretionary decisions in the World Anti-Doping Code and uses case studies to show possible effects.
• The authors note that earlier literature on anti-doping publicness is outdated and does not reflect WADA’s evolving role, including education.