The original enforcement period for a version of the sanctions proposed by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) that was substantially altered and reduced from four years to two by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) comes to an end on Saturday (December 17).

The key question thereafter will be how WADA proceeds in terms of reinstating the Russian Anti-Doping Agency (RUSADA).

There is wide divergence of opinion on the efficacy of measures that has since been subsumed under the more pressing and painful matter of whether Russian and Belarus athletes should have the right to compete internationally following the invasion of Ukraine that began on February 24.

But on the question of the anti-doping sanctions it eventually issued on December 9, 2019, even WADA itself regards the consequences - post CAS involvement - as a glass half empty.

While many see it simply as a glass empty.

WADA’s sanctions against Russia were announced following confirmation of a widespread and concerted doping regime within Russia and following what it deemed to be a deliberate attempt to cover that regime up through data belatedly delivered from the Moscow Laboratory and then found to have been doctored.

WADA’s Executive Committee unanimously endorsed the recommendation made by the independent Compliance Review Committee (CRC) chaired by Jonathan Taylor QC that the Russian Anti-Doping Agency (RUSADA) be declared non-compliant with the World Anti-Doping Code for a period of four years.

Craig Reedie, the outgoing WADA President, commented: "For too long, Russian doping has detracted from clean sport. The blatant breach by the Russian authorities of RUSADA’s reinstatement conditions, approved by the ExCo in September 2018, demanded a robust response. That is exactly what has been delivered today.

"Russia was afforded every opportunity to get its house in order and re-join the global anti-doping community for the good of its athletes and of the integrity of sport, but it chose instead to continue in its stance of deception and denial.

"As a result, the WADA ExCo has responded in the strongest possible terms, while protecting the rights of Russian athletes that can prove that they were not involved and did not benefit from these fraudulent acts."

But were they the strongest possible terms? It could be, and often has been argued that the strongest possible sanction was to impose a straightforward, blanket ban.

The sanctions stopped short of that, offering Russian athletes a pathway to compete under neutral status "where they are able to demonstrate that they are not implicated in any way by the non-compliance".

The other main points were:

The Russian flag and anthem would be banned at major events.

A ban on Russian Government officials sitting on Boards or Committees of code signatories; a ban on Russian Government representatives attending Olympic and Paralympic Games and World Championships.

A ban on Russia hosting or bidding for major events.

A ban on senior Russian Olympic or Paralympic Committee members attending major events.

At the time, WADA vice-president Linda Helleland said that, though she voted in favour of the CRC recommendation, she would have preferred to support a blanket ban.

"Unfortunately, at the [WADA Executive Committee] meeting in the Seychelles [in September 2018]…the Russian Anti-Doping Agency (RUSADA) was made compliant without having delivered the data from their lab," Helleland said.

"Now we know that decision was wrong."

In the wake of the decision, Britain's Paralympic rowing bronze medallist Victoria Aggar resigned from the organisation's Athlete Committee.

Aggar, chair of the British Athletes' Commission (BAC), claimed WADA had made "too many bad decisions, compromises and broken promises" due to "political games and too many conflicts".

The Paralympic rowing bronze medallist said WADA's decision to ignore the Committee's calls for Russia to be banned from the Olympic and Paralympic Games was the "biggest blow".

Aggar also claimed WADA had refused to publish recent Athlete Committee statements on the organisation's website.

This included a statement from nine of the 17-member WADA Athlete Committee which had called for a blanket ban.

Olivier Niggli, the WADA secretary general. responded by saying a lack of consensus among the Athlete Committee had been central to the statement not being published.

Russia, inevitably, and as was its right, appealed to CAS. And a year on, on December 17, 2020, the latter’s judgement was made public.

Despite accusing Russia of "covering up the cover-up", the three-strong panel reduced the four-year period to a two-year period and altered other parts of the original WADA ruling.

Witold Bańka, who had succeeded Reedie as WADA President, said he was "pleased to have won this landmark case" but added: "We are, however, disappointed that the CAS Panel did not endorse each and every one of our recommended consequences for the four-year period we requested."

While Russia's flag and anthem remained banned from the 2020 and 2022 Olympic Games in Tokyo and Beijing, crucially, Russian athletes were enabled to compete under the Russian Olympic Committee banner at the Games and World Championships without having to engage in the rigorous process of proving their innocence that WADA had required.

The CAS panel found WADA's decision would "probably lead to lengthy investigations and subsequent litigation as to whether an athlete has been able to discharge the burden".

It added that the WADA condition would "potentially involve athletes being required to access the massive amount of data involved in this case, perhaps in a fruitless and time-consuming search to discover whether they are implicated or even mentioned in the database or the circumstances of the noncompliance".

It was thus an effective continuation of the 2018 Winter Olympic Games in Pyeongchang, where Russian athletes competed as the "Olympic Athletes from Russia" - and indeed where Russia's victorious men’s ice hockey team sang their national anthem in defiance of the ruling.

The CAS also explained its decision to allowing the word "Russia" to feature on athletes' uniforms.

The panel claimed it was appropriate "to impose a modified and less restrictive version" than proposed by WADA, ruling the conditions Russian athletes may participate under "should allow some limited association with the name and colours of their homeland where necessary, but subject to restrictions as to the use of the Russian flag, national symbols and the Russian national anthem in a sport, recognition or awards capacity".

In justifying the reduction of the sanctions period from four to two years, the CAS said: "This accommodates a balance between the WADA submission that the purpose of the consequences is that the athlete will not be associated with Russia, and the opposing concern that clean athletes should not be affected by neutrality conditions for any longer than is justified".

As with the original WADA statement, there was widespread criticism of the CAS ruling.

The Institute of National Anti-Doping Organisations (iNADO) claimed the decision sent a "confusing" anti-doping message to athletes and said it was "difficult to understand" why Russia did not receive the "same sanction of four years that any individual athlete would receive for cheating deliberately".

The statement added: "It is difficult to digest that Russian neutral athletes will be allowed to compete at next year's Olympic Games in Tokyo in Russian colours and with their country's name on their uniforms.

"iNADO is deeply concerned about the message this decision sends to current and future generations of athletes with regards to tolerance of doping in sport.

"Sport needed to close this chapter decisively and irrefutably by demonstrating that those who cheat, deceit, and deny, will face significant and clear consequences.

"This was achieved only partially."

The United States Anti-Doping Agency chief executive Travis Tygart felt it was "disingenuous" to describe the CAS decision as a victory for clean athletes.

"It's frustrating to see those that are supposed to be standing up for clean sport, claiming this as a landmark victory," he said. "It's just disingenuous and, I don't know if it's intentional to mislead people, but let's call it for what it is.

"The outcome for athletes, going forward and in the past, is not helpful at all."

The Canadian Olympic Committee, New Zealand Olympic Committee, United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee and German Olympic Sports Federation also criticised the watering down of the sanctions.

RUSADA officials also claimed a win in the dispute.

And so insidethegames has posed the question to the WADA President as the end of the two-year period looms - what has the WADA ban achieved?

"It is not a 'WADA ban'," Bańka responded. 

"It is a suite of consequences imposed by the Court of Arbitration for Sport after a WADA investigation successfully uncovered widespread manipulation of data retrieved by WADA I&I from the Moscow Laboratory in 2019.

"As you know, WADA sought much stronger consequences.

"Although CAS upheld WADA’s findings regarding the data manipulation, it imposed consequences that were substantially more lenient than those sought by WADA and did so only for a period of two years rather than the four sought by WADA.

"The case has shown the world that WADA is prepared to stand up to those who seek to cheat the system, no matter who they are or where they come from.

"If WADA had not pursued this case to the end and if no consequences had been imposed, the message would have been catastrophic - that you can cheat the system and get away with it - and confidence in the system would have been severely undermined.

On the question of whether he remains disappointed that CAS halved the proposed sanction and whether he understood the reasoning behind their decision, Bańka replied:

"The CAS Panel clearly upheld our findings that the Russian authorities brazenly manipulated the Moscow Laboratory data in an effort to cover up an institutionalised doping scheme. In the face of continual resistance and denial from Russia, we clearly proved our case, in accordance with due process.

"As a result, I remain very disappointed that the CAS Panel decided not to impose all the consequences that WADA sought.

"In particular, it was discouraging that CAS cut the time that the consequences would stand from our proposed four years to just two. I remain convinced that our proposed consequences were proportionate and reasonable, but ultimately CAS was the judge and it disagreed."

Asked if he regretted participation of Russian teams in major events under the banner of the Russian Olympic Committee, and whether this had detracted from what WADA was trying to do with the original ban, he responded:

"WADA asked CAS to allow participation under stringent neutrality conditions. These were significantly watered down by CAS. WADA also asked that Russian athletes be subject to minimum mandatory testing in advance of major events in order to be eligible. This was also not accepted by CAS.

"To be clear, I regret all the ways in which WADA’s proposed consequences were watered down by CAS. We arrived at those consequences following a robust investigation, thorough assessment of all the evidence and full consideration of the options. Our proposed consequences were proportionate and reasonable."

Earlier this month the Russian Olympic Committee President, Stanislav Pozdnyakov, made Russia's imminent expectations clear. "On December 17, the time for sanctions expires," he said. "There is a lot of speculation. But there are no prerequisites for the flag restrictions or other [restrictions] to be extended.

"The CAS decision has been implemented."

But Bańka said that there will be no automatic status ante quo on December 17.

"RUSADA remains non-compliant," he said. 

"Once the two-year period covered by the CAS award elapses on 17 December 2022, WADA management will initiate a comprehensive review to carefully assess whether RUSADA has met all the conditions of reinstatement as laid out in the CAS award.

"Once WADA management considers that all conditions have been met, it will refer the matter to the independent Compliance Review Committee (CRC) for its review.

"If the CRC agrees, it will make a recommendation to the WADA Executive Committee (ExCo). Failure to meet the reinstatement conditions in full would lead to RUSADA’s non-compliance status being maintained until such time as they have been met."

WADA and Russia have more recently been at odds over the case of figure skater Kamila Valieva.

Valieva, then 15, tested positive for the banned substance trimetazidine during the Russian National Figure Skating Championships in late December 2021.

RUSADA provisionally suspended the young figure skater for one day before lifting the ban.

Valieva was then free to compete at the 2022 Winter Olympic Games in Beijing, where she won team gold with the ROC team.

The following day, insidethegames exclusively reported the legal challenge over the awarding of the team event medals and later revealed it to be an anti-doping case related to Valieva.

The CAS Ad Hoc Division allowed her to compete in the women's event - with a decision to be made on whether a ban would be issued at a later date - but the young prodigy suffered from many falls in the free skate, dropping from first to fourth in the standings.

WADA is seeking a four-year ban for Valieva, believing RUSADA did not take sufficient action over the positive test, and has appealed the ruling to CAS.

Meanwhile, Pozdnyakov has said a ban on Valieva would be unfair.

Asked if the current dispute with the Russian Olympic Committee over this case would have an impact upon the judgements WADA make about ending RUSADA's status of non-compliance, Bańka replied:

"WADA’s position on that case has been clear at all stages. Despite putting RUSADA under formal notice to resolve it promptly, no progress was made in a reasonable timeframe. So, on 8 November 2022, WADA officially referred it directly to CAS. As the case is pending, we cannot comment further at this stage.

"This case does not form part of the CAS decision of December 2020 and therefore, is not linked to the reinstatement of RUSADA.

"However, the rules state that a non-compliant signatory cannot be reinstated if a further non-conformity is discovered and remains unresolved.

"WADA’s virtual audit of RUSADA in September identified a number of non-conformities. Even if the reinstatement conditions in the CAS Award are met, therefore, RUSADA cannot be reinstated until all the further non-conformities arising from the virtual audit have been resolved."

Speaking after the World Athletics Council meeting in Rome on November 30, Rune Andersen - chair of the Taskforce working on the reinstatement of the Russian Athletics Federation, which was banned in November 2015 following the doping programme revelations - said RUSADA is now judged by WADA to be working well at an operative level.

Asked how much of a factor that might be in the WADA assessment, Bańka responded: "Mr. Andersen does not speak on behalf of WADA. RUSADA's performance will be assessed by WADA as part of the aforementioned process. The RusAF situation is a matter for World Athletics."

Finally, on the subject of how hopeful he felt in general that Russia can continue in sport without organised doping, the WADA President said:

"We are not naïve. Trust in Russia's anti-doping system is very low. The authorities there have a lot of work to do to rebuild that trust. The ball is very much in Russia’s court."

All in all it was not a response to bring unbounded joy and relief to Russian hearers. 

But again, other voices are reiterating the view that, even before the CAS watering action, the WADA sanctions were weak as "neutral" Russian athletes have taken part in numerous internatipnal events and championships in the interim.

There has clearly been an effect on Russia in terms of its hosting of international events.

But even this element has been compromised.

In February 2021, for instance, United World Wrestling (UWW) confirmed it would not hold its 2022 World Championships in the Russian city of Krasnoyarsk as scheduled. But the federation simply shifted it to 2023 in anticipation of the sanctions having been lifted.

"As soon as it was able to give Russia a major event, and all the benefits that comes with it, the UWW did so," my former colleague Liam Morgan observed.

"That sends a poor message to athletes and other officials across the world who have called for the nation to receive the punishments orchestrating a state-sponsored doping scandal merit."

In an interview on United States television network HBO in September as part of the Real Sports programme, former deputy to the WADA director general Rob Koehler, who left the organisation in 2018, alleged the IOC swayed decisions "very easily" and claimed there was "a lack of efficiency" in catching athletes committing doping offences during his time at WADA.

Koehler also claimed that when he recommended that Russian athletes should be banned from competing at the Pyeongchang 2018 Winter Olympics in response to state-sponsored doping, he was told to "back off."

In response WADA told insidethegames that Koehler had "presented these allegations entirely without evidence", and claimed that it "went after Russia vigorously."

In the interview Koehler alleged: "It was stated directly to me that 'Russia is the most powerful sporting nation'.

"The IOC is a 50 per cent partner {in WADA}. We don't want to piss them off, so back off."

In response to a question from interviewer Jon Frankel about whether the IOC wanted Russia at Pyeongchang 2018, Koehler replied: "100 per cent. They were more interested in protecting Russian interests than they were clean sport."

Asked for his assessment of the efficacy of the WADA sanctions on Russia, Koehler - now director general of the Sport Advocacy group Global Athlete - told insidethegames:

"The sports movement has a stranglehold on WADA and CAS and their missions; the IOC actions have made it clear they have no desire to relax this control.

"The manner in which this entire anti-doping scandal has been handled is a clarion bell to change for those concerned about integrity and fairness in sport. Those institutions tasked with upholding the principles of fairness and integrity in sport have proven themselves compromised and incapable of principled decision-making at every turn."

Referring to the previous WADA President, Sir Craig Reedie, Koehler added: "The fact that the IOC manages CAS and that the CAS President is also an IOC vice-president provides little confidence that the arbitral body is actually independent.

"The fact that the Olympic Movement members during the May 2018 WADA Executive Committee meeting openly and actively tried to relax RUSADA conditions for return to compliance is telling.

"Russia carried out one of the biggest anti-doping frauds of this century and WADA, who promised in September 2018 to enforce the strongest sanctions, has shown it is simply a lapdog of the IOC.

"It is clear to athletes and the public that WADA and CAS are prioritising the interests of the IOC. From day one the IOC has been lenient and has continued to give Russia their 'get out of free jail card'.

"If Russia’s institutionalized doping does not merit the highest sanction from WADA and CAS, nothing will.

"To this day, WADA and CAS had the power but lacked the courage to use that power; likely in fear of repeated retribution by the IOC that was experienced during the 2016 Rio Olympic Games for recommending a complete ban of Russia.

"To the detriment of athletes, Russia has never been banned, they have simply been rebranded.

"On the eve a Russian decision it is likely history will repeat itself that international sport and anti-doping leaders will not be prepared to ban Russia for failing to fulfil its reinstatement conditions. Once again Russian interests are prioritized over athlete interests."

On WADA's disappointment over the way in which their original sanctions were watered down by the CAS, Koehler again insisted the sanctions were not sufficient in the first place.

"WADA never used the extent of their powers on Russia," he said.

"In fact, WADA’s declaration of RUSADA’s non-compliance actually included no sanctions towards them. RUSADA was permitted to do testing, result management and education.

"To the athletes, the message WADA was sending once again is it is business as usual despite the biggest doping scandal this century.

"In addition WADA let the IOC walk all over their so called 'Russian Ban' by allowing athlete to compete under the banner of 'Olympic Athletes from Russia'.

"WADA is trying to rewrite history and use the typical IOC strategy to blame CAS when it is WADA that provided leniency to Russia from the beginning."