Originally Posted by Trevor98
Wrong. Many other Western governments share this standard making it is western concept rather than a US one. Specifically the EU shares this concept and all member states are required to adopt it.
I think what most people confuse as a difference between our (American) legal system and the rest of western law is the writ of habeas corpus. Further more the UCI and WADA are not working within any 'legal' system. They a have established a set of rules and athletes are subject to those rules. If you break those rules you will be punished. What has happened is that in WADA's over zealous approach to halt doping in cycling, WADA, the UCI and now the teams are taking measures that basically convict a rider if he or she is implicated in a doping investigation. What is hard for some to separate is that the WADA code of ethics is not the same as a set of laws as we (Americans) know them. Once an athlete or team agrees to this code of ethics and to abide by the punishments that are imposed by breaking this code then any semblance of 'law' is forfeited. This makes it doubly hard when there is evidence that the lab or it's technicians failed to follow proper protocol in establishing an athletes 'cleanliness' after he's been tested. In just agreeing to be suspended once implicated a rider is now viewed as guilty and must now prove his/her innocence.