The Russian Olympic Committee (ROC) published the audit report of RUSADA head of the domestic anti-doping structure, which, as warned on the eve of President OKR Stanislav Pozdnyakov, revealed “serious breaches” in the activities of the organization and its Director General, consistent criticism of the sports authority of the country of Yury Ganus. Mostly, though, we are talking about “potential” violations.The Olympic Committee of Russia, is the founder of the RUSADA along with the Paralympic Committee of Russia, has published a report (.pdf) on the results of a study of the effectiveness of the internal control system in relation to the business processes of the Russian anti-doping Agency for 2018-2019 conducted by the audit company “FinExpertiza”. Publication took place on the day after the statements of President OKR of Stanislav Pozdnyakov discovered during the audit RUSADA “serious violations”. The reason for testing was the fact that the Agency’s Director General Yuri Hanus, a consistent critic of the position of the Ukrainian authorities in conflict with the world anti-doping Agency (WADA) and their actions in connection with the most recent manifestations of a doping crisis, “tried to retroactively approve and auditor, and audit reporting”.Photo: Alexander Miridonov, Kommersanty the conclusion of “FinExpertiza” the audit said set “number of facts” which “are or may carry potential risks of corruption, conflict of interest, abuse of law, abuse of position of RAA RUSADA, the risks associated with the activities of other companies, as well as IP.” In addition, “with high probability” established facts “falsification of signatures” on contracts of civil nature. And “given the fact that the issue of working with individual contractors, civil contracts is inextricably linked with the financing of their activities and, as a consequence of this is corruption-intensive, and also due to the fact that individuals in 2018 of services rendered PAA RUSADA approximately 57 million, and in 2019 from 53 million rubles,” it “may potentially point out the facts of corruption and corrupt behaviour”. Also an established fact “FinExpertiza” is considered to be “pre-fixed reports on the use of taxi services” staff RUSADA that “may indicate improper use” and “on the lack of control over it.” For example, about the “selective application of the law” in determining the remuneration for employees of RUSADA, a “disconnect” in reporting on the results of the mission of Yuri Ganoza and his Deputy Margarita Ponikau and “invalid” methods of work with personnel: the auditor suggests that the Agency employees could be “pressure”, for example, to force to write the application about dismissal at own will.In a statement, OCD, devoted to the publication of the report, said that evaluation of RUSADA “is the exclusive competence of the Supervisory Board” structure. It passed the test results. The Supervisory Board “shall consider the submissions, to analyze and evaluate the content and nature of violations, and to react in the framework of their powers”.Arnold Boars“b” has collected the history of doping athletes from 2000 godcity next