Johannesburg - A member of Ludwick Mamabolo's legal team lashed out at the SA Institute for Drug Free Sport (Saids) on Friday after the anti-doping body announced that the Comrades Marathon winner's B-sample had tested positive.
"The anti-doping rules of Saids provide for confidentiality during processes and hearings relating to allegations of doping," human rights lawyer Brian Currin said in a statement.
"The confidentiality provision was breached after the A-sample test, causing irreparable damage to Mr Ludwick Mamabolo's reputation and brand.
"Saids has chosen to breach their own rules, once again, by publishing the results of the B-sample."
However, Saids said the guidelines of the World Anti-Doping Code gave it the right to publicly release the name of an athlete who had been informed of doping charges prior to the tribunal phase.
Saids CEO Khalid Galant said this option was exercised when the nature of the event, in terms of prize money, medals and playoff ramifications, had immediate relevance.
Mamabolo's attorneys, Werksmans, said they would advise him on his legal remedies in relation to Saids' "violations".
They believed there was a matter of concern in the sample reports.
"Having considered the available evidence in relation to the process of taking his urine after completion of the Comrades Marathon, I have grave concerns about the efficacy of the samples taken," Currin said.
"I have also carefully studied the Sample A and Sample B reports and find what I believe to be a material defect.
"These issues will be dealt with at the tribunal hearing. No further details will be provided at this stage."
Mamabolo's B-sample confirmed the presence of methylhexaneamine after his A-sample tested positive for the banned stimulant following his victory in the 89km ultra-marathon in Durban last month.
Galant said the analysis of the B-sample had taken place at the SA Doping Control Laboratory in Bloemfontein. Mamabolo was present and witnessed the breaking of the seal of the sample.
It would take approximately three months for a decision to be handed down, according to Saids, but Galant said some cases took longer to conclude due to adjournments or requests to present additional evidence in mitigation.
Mamabolo would have the right to lodge an appeal against the tribunal decision, if he disagreed with the sanction.
Currin said Mamabolo continued to maintain his innocence.