Sporting considerations will be at the centre of the matter, but the Australian Sports Anti-doping Authority will on Monday rely on a 58-page submission that cites cases involving subjects as diverse as sexual misconduct from a Tasmanian psychiatrist, the deportation of a marijuana dealer in the 1970s and native title rights in Western Australia.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The opening submission lodged by ASADA with the federal court on Friday also references speeches made by then-shadow attorney-general George Brandis, and current St Kilda CEO and previously AFL Players Association CEO Matt Finnis.
ASADA is seeking to deny a claim made by Essendon and suspended coach James Hird that the anti-doping authority acted beyond its statutory boundaries in conducting a joint investigation with the AFL. In doing so, ASADA will draw on a multitude of explanatory documents that it believes will sway Justice John Middleton to decide in its favour.
ASADA has also submitted to the court that even in the event that it was held to have acted outside its jurisdiction, a permanent injunction should not be granted to Essendon, Hird and the 34 players issued in June with show-cause notices, which would prevent evidence obtained during the course of the investigation being used in any future probe.
The submission made by ASADA is littered with references to cases dealing with statutory interpretation. In attempting to show that it was empowered to share information with the AFL, the anti-doping body cites the ASADA Act, which includes a provision allowing for the disclosure of ''information, documents or things obtained in relation to the administration of the national anti-doping scheme for the purposes of, or in connection with, that administration''.
In seeking to extrapolate what that means, ASADA cites the 2002 native title case of Western Australia v Ward, in which it was deemed that the phrase ''in connection with'' is to be construed broadly.
The argument that any future proceedings should in any event not be barred is supported by the 2006 case of Launceston psychiatrist Ian Martin, who was deregistered after a tribunal found that he had been involved in a sexual relationship with a complainant.
The judgment in the Martin case stated that ''a tribunal is not bound by the rules of evidence means that it may have regard to evidence that is logically probative regardless of whether it is legally admissible under the rules of evidence''.
There was a previous football connection to that case, namely that Martin was represented by former Fitzroy president Dyson Hore-Lacy.
The 1979 case of Canberra-based drug dealer Luigi Pochi, and the attempt to deport him on the grounds that he had never become an Australian citizen following his immigration is used as authority for the notion that ''facts can be fairly found without demanding adherence to the rules of evidence''.
Brandis, who is now the federal Attorney-General, and Finnis are both mentioned by virtue of speeches they gave to a senate committee hearing in March 2013, relating to proposed amendments to the ASADA legislation.
Justice Middleton has set aside three days for the case. The opening submissions will be broadcast live on ABC television on Monday morning.
