CAS 2013/A/3071 Ana Beatriz di Rienzo Bulcão v. Fédération Internationale d’Escrime (FIE)
Fencing
Doping (boldenone; androstatrienedione)
Burden of the athlete to establish a departure from the IST by a balance of probability
Signature of the doping control form without making any comment about the sample collection process
Delay of more than 30 days between the date of the urine sample collection and the date the samples arrived at the laboratory
Starting date of the period of ineligibility in case of substantial delay not attributable to the athlete
1. According to the FIE anti-doping rules, the burden is on the fencer to establish, by a balance of probability, a departure from the International Standards for Testing (IST) that could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF). If the fencer does so, the burden shifts to the FIE to prove to the comfortable satisfaction of the Tribunal (or the CAS panel) that the departure did not cause the AAF.
2. The fact that, first, the athlete could not choose the kit and the collection vessel and, second, it was the DCO and not she who closed the bottles and manipulated the seals system cannot establish validly a departure from the IST if the athlete signed the doping control form and certified that the entire process has been performed according to the rules, without making any comment.
3. A delay of more than 30 days between the date of the urine sample collection and the date the samples arrived at the laboratory does not respect the 14 days time limit provided for in the FIE Rules. However, such a departure from the FIE Rules does not lead to the nullity of the result of the analysis performed. That would only be the case, should the athlete reasonably demonstrate that such delay has been the origin of the AAF.
4. The period of ineligibility starts on the date of the hearing decision providing for ineligibility or may start at an earlier date commencing as early as the date of the sample collection in case there has been substantial delay in some aspects of the doping control not attributable to the athlete.
In May 2012 the International Fencing Federation (FEI) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Brazilian fencer Ana Beatriz di Rienzo Bulcão after her A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance androsta-1,4,6-triene-3,17-dione (androstatrienedione) and boldenone.
On 7 January 2013 the FEI Anti-Doping Disciplinary Tribunal decided to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.
Hereafter in January 2013 the Athlete appealed the FEI decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The Athlete requested the Panel to set aside the FEI decision of 7 January 2013 and to impose a reduced sanction. The Athlete argued that several departures occurred from the IST during the sample collection and alleged that her sample vessel could have been manipulated.
Considering the evidence in this case the Panel finds it impossible that the Athlete’s urine sample could have been mixed, tampered with or contaminated; furthermore, the Athlete does not give any reason why she would have been victim of a conspiracy.
The Panel rules that the Athlete failed to establish that, if occurred, a departure of the IST could have caused the AAF; thus, the sample collection process was duly conducted according to the IST and the FIE Rules.
The Panel concludes that the presence of the prohibited substances boldenone and ATD of exogenous origin in the Athlete’s sample is established and it is undisputable that the Athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation without grounds for a reduced sanction.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 12 August 2013 that:
1.) The appeal filed by Ms Ana Beatriz Di Rienzo Bulcão on January 23, 2013 is partially upheld.
2.) Ch. 2 Part 2 of the Decision of the FIE Doping Disciplinary Tribunal dated January 7, 2013 is modified as follows:
Ms Ana Beatrziz Di Rienzo Bulcao is automatically disqualified of her results in the Pan-American Fencing Championships of March 2012 and is ineligible to compete for a period of two years starting from May 6 2012.
3.) (…).
4.) (…).
5.) All other and further claims or prayers for relief are dismissed.
