Well you can’t claim a state sponsored doping program exists without proving that the state initiated it. Funding is obviously already there but you’d have to show intentional funding and deception beyond the level of Rodchenkov. Shall we hold WADA and IAAF to the same standard of failing to execute their responsibilities. The IAAF had wrong-doing from its President, Head Anti Doping official, and the son of the President all of whom were encouraging doping and then bribing athletes. We all know that nearly all of the doping happened here. WADA certainly signs commitments when accrediting officials for nations too. When it’s officials cheat like in Sochi the entire organization is responsible by your argument especially considering they tipped rodchenkov off that they were going to investigate the sample bottles a week ahead of time. They tipped off the IAAF years prior to the German documentary came out and never followed up until the story went public.
You're talking legal terms of art now--you have to be very precise with the language. The Schmid commission was rightfully reluctant to find state sponsored doping without a smoking gun. They have no jurisdiction to subpoena anything so it would be hard to investigate that. But, more importantly, they are not required to find state-sponsored doping. There were several subordinated government agencies who engaged in wrongdoing. That's against the Olympic Charter because the Ministry and Committee have an oversight role. Either they knew OR they should have known. That's all you need for vicarious liability to apply.