Agree with the treat everyone as equal premise, but equal is never equal, so saying that I would almost like to reverse it, so the higher the ranking, the more responsibility/consequences as they have more resource, have been at it longer and frankly should know better. Something on the lines of "With great power comes great responsibility."
Also, don't like the blanket guilty until proven innocent premise. Of course people shouldn't benefit from doping, but immediate removal seems unfair too. Maybe some rule about retrospective removal of points/money earnt during ban period and a fine dependent on earnings/ranking if found guilty, the retrospective ban being from the day they failed the drugs test. Also something around the levels, so if a performance enhancing level is found then immediate removal from competition, but to give time for evidence gathering for these lower levels.
The problem with that approach Helen is that it indirectly impacts on many others too. If said player is later found guilty, all the players who they may have beaten during the interim would have a fair case to say they've been unfairly treated and lost out on opportunities as a result.
There's no easy answer other than processing ALL cases as fast as possible and having centralised funding to do so.
Apparently 3 players tested positive at that tournament but only 1 (Tara) for Nandrolone and apparently quite a lot of it although we won't know the exact figure unless the full report is released.