Essendon coach James Hird has lost his second bid to have the ASADA/AFL doping probe into the club ruled illegal.
Federal Court Justice Susan Kenny said there was nothing illegal in the way ASADA and the AFL carried out their joint investigation.
“The legislative scheme envisaged that there would be close co-operation between ASADA and sporting administration bodies such as the AFL,” she said on Friday.
She said the 34 past and present players accused of taking a banned substance suffered no unfairness in the way ASADA conducted its interviews.
“Mr Hird and the 34 players voluntarily accepted the obligations under the AFL’s player rules and Anti-Doping Code to attend interviews and answer questions fully and truthfully, or face possible sanction by the AFL,” she said.
“Mr Hird and the 34 players were all legally represented at their interviews.
“They could have been in no doubt about the purposes of the interview.”
She dismissed the appeal on Friday on behalf of the full bench of the court and ordered Hird pay ASADA’s costs.
Hird was not at the court for the judgment.
The Essendon coach was fighting to discredit ASADA’s joint investigation with the AFL for a second time after a Federal Court judge found the probe to be legal in September.
But he did so alone, after breaking ranks with his club to appeal Justice John Middleton’s finding.
His barrister Peter Hanks QC told last November’s appeal ASADA had illegally recruited the AFL to force Essendon players to answer questions.
But ASADA barrister Tom Howe QC told the Federal Court its lock-step co-operation with the AFL was a conscious and legal decision.
He acknowledged ASADA had no coercive powers of its own but said the National Anti-Doping (NAD) scheme envisaged the two bodies working together to investigate the club’s 2012 supplements program.