The Court of Arbitration for Sport’s much-anticipated judgement will decide their fate and the fate of the British Olympic Association’s bylaw for drugs cheats.
The BOA’s law sees convicted cheats – like sprinter Chambers and cyclist Millar – banned from the Olympics for life however crucially it is not a stance shared by other nations.
The expected result is that the bylaw will be found to be incompatible with global anti-doping rules, punishing individuals on two occasions for the same crime.
The confidence that Chambers and Millar will win the right to compete comes largely from the precedent of the case of US sprinter LaShawn Merritt.
Merritt successfully challenged the IOC’s ‘Rule 45′ – which gave cheats a one-Games ban as well as a two-year suspension – and his success has galvanised thoughts that the BOA’s bylaw will go the same way.
The fate of the likes of Millar, Chambers and British shot-putter Carl Myerscough is a divisive issue in Olympic sport with the BOA insisting their bylaw has the backing of athletes.
Similarly London 2012 chairman Lord Sebastian Coe is adamant that Monday’s hearing should rule in the BOA’s favour.
“My position on this is well known,” said Lord Coe. “I think it is right for sporting organisations to have the autonomy to decide who they want to see in their teams.”
However, Olympic triple jump gold medallist Jonathan Edwards begs to differ, saying: “Athletes should get a second chance. I wouldn’t personally support a lifetime ban.”
© Sportsbeat 2012
MORE: The latest football news
MORE: The latest tennis news