The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) later reinstated Gatlin after he had served only one year of the ban but never specifically said Gatlin had “no fault” in the case.

The United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) characterised Gatlin’s reinstatement as a reduction in the ban whereas Gatlin contended it vacated the finding of a doping offence.

The panel said Gatlin could go through an appeals process to seek a finding of no fault in the first case or ask the IAAF for a clarification on its earlier ruling.

“The actions of the IAAF clearly suggest at a minimum, a finding of ‘no significant fault’ in 2001,” the panel said. “However, there is no evidence from which this panel may determine that a finding of ‘no fault’ under the current WADA standard was made or could be inferred.”

“No significant fault” would leave Gatlin still somewhat responsible for the positive test, and it would remain a first offense. A “no fault” finding would erase the offence.

The 2001 findings came under different standards than those in effect now because the World Anti-Doping Code had yet to be established.

A family member who said he was speaking on Gatlin’s behalf told The Associated Press “the fight is not over for us.”

“We feel we were wrongly done,” said the man who answered the phone at Gatlin’s parents home but declined to give his name. “He has a disability. The family is going to sit down. We’re going to decide where to go next.”

... contd.