Kieran Perkins is a great nomination, bigallan. I would suggest that the panel and the direction the panel takes will be determined by the establishment institutions you mention. A proper enquiry requires groups and/or individuals who have different, even dissenting views, ideas, experiences, philosophies to these institutions who are riddled with conflicts of interest and a “protect the image” mindset.
Howman has a massive conflict of interest being a WADA executive and a member of the IOC. He travelled the world espousing the need for CAS deliver a guilty verdict in the Essendon case, and they delivered. He now sits on a panel in judgement of an anti-doping framework than is riddled with problems created by our association with WADA. One might suggest that ASADA was created in WADA’s image.
Howman’s inclusion on this panel should be challenged (but it won’t). His views and input on the panel must be challenged (but they won’t).
“The Code has been drafted giving consideration to the principles of proportionality and human rights.” This sentence is contained in the opening statement in the current version of the WADA Code (2015). This same statement was buried in the previous version but was brought front and centre in this latest version after much discussion amongst Olympics delegates and former athletes.
Certainly Howman’s WADA didn’t adhere to their own guiding principles when dealing with the Essendon 34. And again he sits in judgement of Australian athletes.