07/10/2026 – The Cyclists’ Alliance (TCA) is calling on the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) to clarify how it will implement the conditions imposed on Joffrey Vitiere following findings that he breached its Code of Ethics, including provisions protecting professional mountain bike rider Isla Short’s physical and mental integrity.
Isla reported concerns about someone she trusted and depended on to support her mountain bike career. The UCI Ethics Commission found that Vitiere acted as her de facto manager and primary source of funding, despite not holding the licence required for the managerial functions he performed.
The Commission found that he carried out unwanted massages without a massage qualification and failed to respect Isla’s physical and mental integrity under Article 6.4 of the UCI Code of Ethics. It expressly rejected the assumption that the absence of an explicit objection amounted to free consent, recognising his position of power and Isla’s financial dependency. The verdict also found a breach of Article 5, concerning general principles.
The sanction comprises a reprimand and educational measures. Vitiere must complete a safeguarding and/or team-management course approved in advance by the UCI within twelve months. Completion of that training, together with an appropriate licence, is a prerequisite for any future role managing a team or accompanying riders at UCI events.
TCA welcomes the Commission’s confirmation that Vitiere was subject to the UCI Code of Ethics despite not holding the required licence. This is an important finding for rider protection; someone performing managerial functions cannot avoid ethical accountability simply by failing to obtain that licence.
A decision must reach the people responsible for enforcing it
The conditions imposed on Vitiere can only protect riders if the people responsible for implementing them know what they are. It remains unclear which stakeholders have received the conditions, what instructions they have been given and who is responsible for acting on a possible breach.
Race organisers, teams and riders who encounter Vitiere need to understand the limits on his involvement. They also need to know where to raise a concern and who has authority to assess it and intervene. Enforcement cannot depend on Isla attending events, monitoring Vitiere or repeatedly reporting concerns.
The decision is published within the Ethics Commission decisions on the UCI’s Judicial Bodies page, without an accompanying press release. There may be legitimate reasons for choosing different approaches to public communication in individual cases. However, the UCI must ensure that those expected to implement the decision are informed.
“A decision cannot provide meaningful protection for athletes unless there is a clear process for putting it into practice. Relevant stakeholders need to know the conditions imposed, what is expected of them and who will assess and act on a possible breach. Publishing a decision does not, by itself, establish that process.” Judith van Maanen, TCA’s Ethics Officer
What TCA is asking for:
The decision already establishes the training requirement, its deadline and the licensing conditions. TCA seeks further engagement with the UCI on five areas concerning their practical implementation:
- Accountability. Who verifies that Vitiere has met the licensing and approved training requirements before undertaking a role covered by the decision?
- Enforcement. Who monitors compliance, assesses a possible breach and has authority to intervene? Monitoring must consider the activities performed, including where someone is described as a sponsor or spectator.
- Responsibility. How are duties shared between the UCI, organisers and teams, and who ensures they receive the conditions and clear instructions? Enforcement cannot depend on Isla or other riders monitoring Vitiere. Beyond this case, TCA calls on the UCI to strengthen licensing enforcement for de facto managers: assess the functions people perform, regardless of their title or employment arrangement; require organisers to check the appropriate licences at accreditation; and provide a clear process for reporting and investigating unlicensed activity.
- Prevention. How will the approved training address the professional boundaries, consent and power imbalance identified by the Commission, and how will understanding be assessed?
- Publication. What criteria guide the UCI’s public communication of Ethics Commission decisions? TCA encourages an accessible public summary of this outcome, alongside direct notification to relevant stakeholders and appropriate protection of Isla’s privacy.
Reporting to the UCI Ethics Commission should lead to support and protection for the complainant.
Short has described the investigation process as a source of further distress. She reports long gaps in communication followed by the UCI requesting short response deadlines, including requests to revisit sensitive testimony and relive those traumatic experiences with a one working day turnaround time after weeks of silence.
TCA is asking the UCI to review its handling of this case and establish clearer standards for supporting complainants. These should include regular updates, reasonable response periods, sensitive explanations of hearing arrangements and measures to reduce unnecessary repetition of testimony.
TCA is in contact with the UCI Integrity Manager and appreciates her engagement. We welcome continued dialogue to review the process, clarify implementation and agree on practical improvements.
Riders who come forward need to know who is responsible for protecting them, how decisions will be enforced and where they can turn for meaningful support.
