- India
- Apr 21
India ‘extremely high’ risk in doping, says World Athletics’ Integrity Unit
• The Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) Board designated India as a country with an “extremely high” risk of doping.
• Indian athletes must now comply with more stringent anti-doping stipulations following the Athletics Federation of India’s (AFI) recategorisation from ‘Category B’ to ‘Category A’, under Rule 15 of the World Athletics’ Anti-Doping Rules.
• This decision was taken by the AIU due to the consistently “extremely high” risk of doping in India which has ranked in the top two for the most Anti-Doping Rule Violations (ADRVs) in athletics between 2022 and 2025.
• Under the World Athletics Anti-Doping Rules, the AIU Board categorises all Member Federations according to their doping risk to the sport.
• ‘Category A’ Member Federations, representing the highest risk, are subject to more stringent requirements under the Rules, including minimum testing requirements for their national team athletes.
• ‘Category B’ Member Federations represent a medium doping risk while ‘Category C’ Member Federations represent a low doping risk.
• Rule 15 of the World Athletics Anti-Doping Rules came into effect in 2019.
• It creates antidoping obligations on national federations who can be held accountable for the anti-doping programmes operated in their country.
• A key requirement is that there must be a reasonable and proportionate anti-doping programme in place for national teams who compete at major championships in the sport of athletics.
• Federations may be categorised according to their doping risk to the sport, with differing specific obligations applying depending on the category.
What is the role of the Athletics Integrity Unit?
• The Athletics Integrity Unit, headquartered in Monaco, works fully independent of World Athletics, the international governing body for track and field athletics, race walking, road, cross country, mountain, trail and ultra-running.
• The Athletics Integrity Unit Board has been delegated full authority to oversee the sport’s integrity issues.
• The Board has a critical governance role rather than a management function, similar in style to that of a corporate board.
• It is responsible for approving and reviewing strategy, policies and plans for the Unit and for appointing and monitoring the performance of the Unit’s Head who is in charge of its day-to-day operations.
• Supporting the head of the unit is a dedicated team of staff that delivers on the key activities: testing, compliance, investigations, intelligence, case management, communications and education.