WADA expects ICC to apply "whereabouts" clause

The World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) is awaiting the International Cricket Council (ICC) to apply the controversial "whereabouts" clause, which has been opposed by the BCCI, in its Anti-Doping Code.

Frederic Donze, WADA Senior Manager Media Relations and Communications, said that the ICC's anti-doping rules were "in compliance with World Anti-Doping Code".

"WADA continues to work with the ICC in the expectation that their out-of-competition testing programme, which has started, will advance and that the whereabouts requirements of the International Standard for Testing will be applied in cricket," he said.

The contentious clause requires cricketers in the common testing pool to furnish details of their whereabouts three months in advance to the anti-doping authorities.

Indian players have rejected the ICC's WADA-compliant Code because of this clause, saying it's a violation of their fundamental right to privacy and poses a security threat as well and the BCCI has supported their stand.

The ICC had last October decided to "suspend" the "whereabouts" clause until the concerns of the Indian players were sorted out.

Last month, ICC CEO Haroon Lorgat said in Mumbai that the world governing body for the game was close to finding a solution to the problem and a consensus would be reached on the matter within a week.

"We are very close to resolving the issue of the whereabouts clause. It's the only contentious point of the WADA resolve. We have found a solution and hopefully the issue will be resolved," Lorgat had said.

"We have got a board meeting coming up next week with the ICC executive board members. We are working closely with all our cricket members. We will present that final proposal to the board members and, hopefully by next week, we should have found a consensus on that particular proposal," he had declared.

However, the official media release issued after the April 20 meeting of the ICC Executive Board in Dubai made no mention of this matter, presumably because no consensus was reached.