A one-year suspension for Charlotte Dujardin is too lenient, and she played the sympathy card by announcing she is pregnant. Or: she will pay her dues and be welcomed back in time for Los Angeles 2028.
That is a small snapshot of the disparate reaction to the FEI’s announcement of Dujardin’s punishment for the lunge-whipping incident that made global headlines just before the Paris Olympic Games (and still does.)
I guess most people have formed their opinions on what they saw, very clearly, for themselves in the infamous video. It’s official now that she used the whip more than 20 times. There is, though, much to unpack from the FEI Tribunal decision notice, despite it being rather shorter than normal.
First, there is a good reason why the notice is only eight pages long (compared to the usual 30 pages-plus in horse abuse decisions.) For the first time, the FEI has handled a serious horse abuse case through negotiated settlement – the FEI version of a plea bargain. Dujardin admitted wrongdoing from the outset, thus obviating the need for a full hearing in front of a Tribunal panel of three to decide if she committed abuse.
Normally, alleged abusers vigorously defend those accusations, causing cases to drag on, sometimes for two years. When riders finally have their day at Tribunal, evidence can make hair-raising reading in the official reports.
Riders showing no remorse generally make things worse for themselves. Dressage rider Leandro da Silva was banned for three years in 2021 for manhandling a small pony, a long ban compared with others handed down around that time. But da Silva dug himself into an even deeper hole by insisting he was trying to teach the pony a lesson – it had bitten his daughter. The Tribunal was clearly appalled by his attitude as well as his actions and doubled the 18-month suspension recommended by the FEI.
Conversely, a negotiated settlement, which is then ratified by a single member of the Tribunal, and a shorter ban was on the cards as soon as Dujardin announced she was ashamed and requested a “provisional” suspension, i.e. standing down from competing while being investigated. This is considered time already served when a ban is finally handed down as punishment.
Furthermore, in the FEI legal system, horse abusers (and dopers) are credited for prompt admission of guilt with a reduced sanction, the same as in the criminal justice system. The moment Dujardin fell on her sword she probably saved herself around six months to a year. This does not often happen, but neither is it a procedural irregularity.
Back in July, I assumed Dujardin’s decision resulted firstly from the video evidence leaving no room for doubt; secondly, a negotiated settlement meant that anything offered in mitigation – eg. her past dealings with the “whistleblower” and why they parted ways – would not have to be recorded as evidence and thus not subject to publication.
But last week’s announcement that Dujardin is having another baby in February provides another significant reason for such pragmatism. If I have the math correct, Dujardin most likely knew she was pregnant just before the Olympic Games at the time of the video leak (July 22). She has also said the pregnancy was planned. Faced with a decidedly unplanned setback a week before the Games, it made practical sense to start her suspension immediately, so that a big chunk of it would coincide with her maternity leave.
That timing will sit badly with many people. But there is nothing anyone can do about that. The Clean Endurance community requested the introduction of delayed sanctions a few years ago, during a spell of intense activity at FEI Tribunal around endurance abuse. Frustratingly, endurance rider bans sometimes coincided with the “closed” season in the Middle East and so had no impact on those riders whatsoever. However, the FEI does not have the legal powers to delay the start of a suspension until a date that most disadvantages the offender.
Another interesting takeaway is that Dujardin was also charged with bringing horse sport into disrepute – a sanction very rarely applied. Under the guidance for sanctions set out in terms in increasing seriousness in FEI General Regulations, the longest anyone can be banned for causing reputational damage is one year.
The FEI might care to revisit that scenario, given the irreparable harm to dressage’s image caused directly by the Dujardin scandal and the Pandora’s box it opened. In the UK alone, Owen Slot, chief sports writer of The Times, has written another long and insightful feature (behind a paywall) about sport horse welfare following last weeks’ announcements. Slot asks some very challenging questions about how the regulatory bodies can decide what constitutes pain in horses when there is no ethical way of finding out. Only a couple of years ago, UK sports desks couldn’t care less about dressage, beyond reporting the latest gold medal. If they covered dressage at all, it was delegated to a junior. This new scrutiny is not going away; journalists of Slot’s calibre cannot be fobbed-off.
Finally, the decision notice is notable for what it doesn’t record: the date on which the lashing of poor Dynamite Hit (aka Gretchen) actually happened.
Dujardin said it was “four years ago” in her original statement, i.e. during 2020. The whistleblower’s lawyer claimed it was more like two to two-and-a-half years ago. However, HorseSport.com has been reliably informed that by late fall 2020, Gretchen was no longer being ridden by the young rider in the video; in all likelihood the incident took place towards the end of that summer.
Covid lockdown regulations in the UK had been slightly relaxed towards the end of 2020, but recreational riding lessons (except where arranged by educational institutions for those studying for industry-recognised qualifications) were still subject to considerable stringency.
The session where the lunge-whipping was filmed took place in an indoor arena, around a two-hour drive from Dujardin’s home; onlookers were present; and it involved at least four people having travelled both themselves and with a horse to a third party location. All of that was forbidden for “recreational” riding lessons under pandemic measures in the UK, and was subject to prosecution and a fine.
Arguably, that fateful session should not have been arranged in the first place. But then again, many people in the horse world play by no one’s rules but their own.
