2023/ADD/59 International Weightlifting Federation (IWF) v. Mr. Armen Alekyan

In 2016, Professor Richard McLaren issued two reports about systemic doping in Russia. These reports identified a significant number of Russian athletes who were involved in, or benefitted from, the doping schemes and practices that he uncovered.

Hereafter in January 2019 the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) recovered the internal database of the Moscow Laboratory (LIMS). Following investigation of allegations of organized doping practices, and in particular of the LIMS, WADA provided international federations with investigation reports on the athletes implicated in these organized doping practices.

As a result in June 2022 the International Testing Agency (ITA), on behalf of the International Weightlifting Federation (IWF), reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Armen Alekyan for the use of the prohibited substances 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone), Oxandrolone and Methylhexaneamine in June and October 2012.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered. Ultimately in May 2023 the case was referred to the CAS Anti-Doping Division (CAS ADD) for a Sole Arbitrator first instance procedure.

At first the Athlete admitted the violation and accepted the consequences. However in July 2022 he retracted his admission and denied the violations.

In his submission the Athlete rejected the charges and requested for annulment of the case. Further he disputed the reliability of the filed evidence in this case provided by WADA, Professor McLaren and Dr Rodchenkov.

In view of the evidence the Sole Arbitrator deems that the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation and that there are aggravating circumstances present in this case. The Arbitrator establishes that the Athlete only denied the charges and failed to file any statement or evidence in his defence.

Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 5 October 2023 that:

1.) The request for arbitration filed on 10 May 2023 by the International Weightlifting Federation is partially upheld.

2.) Mr Armen Alekyan is found to have committed anti-doping rule violations under Article 2.2 of the 2012 IWF ADP.

3.) Mr Armen Alekyan is sanctioned with a period of ineligibility of four (4) years starting on the date of this Award. Any period of provisional suspension effectively served by Mr Armen Alekyan before the date of this Award shall be credited against the total period of ineligibility to be served.

4.) All competitive results obtained by Mr Armen Alekyan from and including 21 June 2012 until 20 June 2016 be disqualified, with all resulting consequences (including forfeiture of medals, points and prizes).

5.) (…).

6.) (…).

7.) All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.

In May 2023 the India National Anti-Doping Agency (INADA) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the powerlifter Jitender after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone), Methyltestosterone, Mephentermine and Phentermine.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete was heard for the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of India (ADDPI).

The Panel finds that the presence of prohibited substances has been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation. The Panel deems that the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional.

Therefore the Panel decides on 5 October 2023 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 1 May 2023.

Related case:

TJD-AD 2023-002 Disciplinary Decision - Cycling
August 3, 2023

On 3 August 2023 the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD) decided to impose a severe 6 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete. Not only tested the Athlete positive for multiple prohibited substances, he also had breached the ordered provisional suspension.

Hereafter both the Athlete and the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) appealed the Decision with the TJD-AD Appeal Panel.

The Rapporteur deems to dismiss the Athlete's appeal as he failed to establish grounds to set aside the Appealed Decision. However ABCD's appeal is deemed to be admissible regarding the Athlete's Provisional Suspension.

ABCD contended that in first instance the Athlete was erroneously sanctioned for 6 years because he had breached the Provisional Suspension. ABCD argued that under the Rules when an athlete breached the Provisional Suspension, then a standard sanction of 4 years shall be imposed, starting on the date of the decision.

Therefore the TJD-AD Appeal Panel decides on 4 October 2023:

• The Athlete's appeal is dismissed;
• The appeal made by ABCD is admissible;
• The 6 year period of ineligibility is set aside;
• Imposed on the Athlete is a 4 year period of ineligibility;
• The sanction shall not start on the date of the Provisional Suspension;
• The sanction shall start on the date of the Appealed Decision, i.e. on 3 August 2023.

Related case:

TJD-AD 2023-003 Disciplinary Decision - Basketball
August 3, 2023


On 3 August 2023 the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD) decided to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the basketball player after he tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis.

Although in first instance the violation was deemed not intentional, the Athlete made no admission and did not accept a provisional suspension. He also failed to demonstrate with evidence that the use of Cannabis occurred out-of-competition.

Hereafter the Athlete appealed the Decision with the TJD-AD Appeal Panel. He requested the Appeal Panel to set aside the Appealed Decision and to impose a reduced sanction, starting on the date of the sample collection.

This time the Athlete admitted the violation and explained that he had used Cannabis for health reasons. With evidence he attempted to demonstrate that he had used the substance out-of-competition in a context unrelated to sport performance.

Considering the evidence in this case the Rapporteur accepts that the violation was not intentional and that the substance was not used in a context to sport performance. However in view of the Athlete's conduct the Rapporteur deems that there are insufficient grounds to reduce the imposed sanction.

Nevertheless the Rapporteur determines that indeed there had been delays in the proceedings not attributed to the Athlete. Consequently this justifies the modification of the starting date of the sanction.

Therefore the TJD-AD Appeal Panel decides on 4 October 2023 to uphold the Appealed Decision and the imposition of a 2 year period of ineligibility. The Appeal Panel decides to modify the starting date of the sanction to be set on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 17 January 2023.

2022/ADD/55 International Bobsleigh & Skeleton Federation (IBSF) v. Anastasia Valerievna Tambovtseva

In 2016, Professor Richard McLaren issued two reports about systemic doping in Russia. These reports identified a significant number of Russian athletes who were involved in, or benefitted from, the doping schemes and practices that he uncovered.

Hereafter in January 2019 the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) recovered the internal database of the Moscow Laboratory (LIMS). Following investigation of allegations of organized doping practices, and in particular of the LIMS, WADA provided international federations with investigation reports on the athletes implicated in these organized doping practices.

As a result in September 2022 the International Bobsleigh & Skeleton Federation (IBSF) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Anastasia Valerievna Tambovtseva for the use of the prohibited substance Methylhexaneamine in October 2012.

Following notification the case was referred to the CAS Anti-Doping Division (CAS ADD) for a Sole Arbitrator first instance procedure. Thereupon an award was rendered based on the written submissions of the Parties.

The IBSF contended that the presence of the prohibited substance had been established in the Athlete's sample. Accordingly the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation and it requested the Panel to impose a sanction of two years. 

The Athlete denied the violation and disputed the reliability of the filed evidence in this case provided by WADA, Professor McLaren and Dr Rodchenkov. Further she argued that she is already retired from the sport and she challenged the jurisdiction of the CAS ADD.

The Sole Arbitrator assessed and addressed the evidence in this case and concludes that:

• ADD has jurisdiction because the IBSF initiated the proceedings against the Athlete before the prescription of the 10-year period;
• The Athlete's Doping Control Form is valid evidence and her signature was not falsified;
• The Moscow Laboratory Data is reliable evidence as confirmed in similar cases;
• The Athlete's test results in the 2015 LIMS is an authentic and reliable document;
• The presence of the prohibited substance  Methylhexaneamine had been established in her sample;
• The sample collection was completed in-competition on 25 October 2012;
• The Athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation;
• There are no grounds for a reduced sanction;
• The period of disqualification shall be from 22 October 2012 until 24 October 2014.

Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 3 October 2023 that:

1.) The request for arbitration filed by the International Bobsleigh & Skeleton Federation (IBSF) on 9 December 2022 is partially upheld.

2.) Ms. Anastasia Valerievna Tambovtseva is found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation in accordance with the FIBT (IBSF) ADR 2009 that was in force on 25 October 2012.

3.) Ms. Anastasia Valerievna Tambovtseva is sanctioned with a two-year period of ineligibility starting from the date of this Award.

4.) All competitive results obtained by Ms. Anastasia Valerievna Tambovtseva from 25 October 2012 until 24 October 2014 are disqualified, with all resulting consequences (including forfeiture of medals, points and prizes).

5.) (…).

6.) (…).

7.) All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.

USADA Annual Report 2022 / United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA). - Colorado Springs : USADA, 2023

In January 2023 Drug Free Sport New Zealand (DFSNZ) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the amateur golf player after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Enobosarm (Ostarine) in a low concentration.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in her defence and she was heard for the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand.

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and at first she could not explain how the substance had entered her system. Supported by experts the Athlete attempted to find the source of the prohibited substance.

The Athlete ruled out sunscreen, make-up, medications and skin-to-skin contact as source because none of the identified substances contained Ostarine. She believed that a kiss with a bodybuilder or tasting of a protein custard power likely had caused to positive test result.

The Tribunal finds that the presence of a prohibited substance had been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that she committed an anti-doping rule violation.

Following assessed of the evidence the Panel rejected the kiss from the bodybuilder as being the probable source of ingestion. Considering the circumstances, and on a balance of probabilites, the Panel deems it more probable than not, that the custard pudding in question was contaminated and that the Athlete unintentionally ingested Ostarine through two spoonsful of it.

The Panel accepts that the Athlete's violation was not intentional and that there were grounds for No Significant Fault or Negligence. The Panel deems that the amateur Athlete acted with a light degree of fault and that she is a truthful and a credible witness.

Therefore the Tribunal decides by majority on 3 October 2023 to impose a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 31 January 2023.

In a separate decision the Tribunal addressed the issue of costs requested by the Athlete.

The Athlete argued that there had been delays and that DFSNZ could have done more to investigate whether the violation was not intentional. Instead she made expenses in order to prove that she acted with No Significant Fault or Negligence.

The Tribunal concludes that the Athlete was unsuccessful in her attempt to establish no fault or negligence and that she had a sanction imposed upon her, the proceeding was not without merit. The Tribunal is also not persuaded that DFSNZ failed to act in good faith.

The Tribunal acknowledges that the Athlete went to considerable expenses through this process. Further the Tribunal recognises that the Athlete had to go some distance to establish that she bore No Significant Fault.

However, the Tribunal is not satisfied that this is an exceptional case where costs should be awarded. It is noted that the Athlete already had benefitted from DFSNZ’s Legal Assistance Fund.

Viewing the Tribunal’s decision against the principle of ‘the loser paying the winner’ DFSNZ proved the ADRVs, in that the prohibited substance was in the athlete’s system, but it failed to prove the ingestion was intentional.

As a result the Tribunal is not persuaded that the circumstances justifiy an award of costs against DFSNZ. Therefore the Tribunal decides on 19 October 2023 that costs will lie as they fall.

In July 2022 the International Equestrian Federation (FEI) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Brazilian Athlete Pedro Stefani Marino after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis in a concentration above the WADA threshold.

Following notification the Athlete filed a statement with evidence in his defence and he was heard for the FEI Tribunal Hearing Panel. The Athlete accepted the test result, admitted the violation and denied the intentional use of the substance.

The Athlete asserted that at the material time he had used Cannabis only out-of-competition and in a context unrelated to sport performance. Further he produced specific information about his consumption of Cannabis products in that period.

He testified that he almost daily had smoked pure Cannabis in November 2021 whereas in December 2021, 4 days before the sample collection, he had smoked a THC vape pen. He assumed that the high concentration THC in his sample was caused by smoking pure Cannabis and the THC Vape pen.

FEI accepted the fact that the Athlete may have smoked the whole THC vape pen (maybe together with a Cannabis joint) on 1 December 2021 for recreational purposes. However FEI deemed that it was highly likely that the Athlete had used Cannabis In-Competition, rather than Out-of-Competition.

FEI excluded the possibility that this consumption caused the AAF which was the subject of the current proceedings. FEI contended that the AAF in the Athlete’s Sample was the result of another Cannabis intake occurring during the In-Competition period.

Following assessment the Panel addressed the Parties' evidence, the scientific studies and the opinions of their expert witnesses. Ultimately the Panel determines that:

• The presence of a prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete's sample;
• The Athlete failed to demonstrate, on a balance of probabilities, that he ingested Cannabis out of competition;
• The Athlete's explanations lack overall credibility as his factual scenario does not match with the scientific evidence;
• The Athlete failed to establish how the Cannabis had entered his system;
• The Athlete failed to establish that he acted with No Significant Fault or Negligence;
• No provisional suspension had been ordered and there had been delays in the proceedings not attributed to the Athlete;
• Fairness requires that the Athlete's results are disqualified only from 15 May 2023.

Therefore the FEI Tribunal Hearing Panel decides on 2 October 2023 to impose a fine and a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the notification of this decision.

In June 2023 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the weightlifter after he tested positive for the prohibited substances Mestanolone and Stanozolol.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete failed to respond and the case was referred to the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD).

Because the Athlete again failed to respond within the set deadline the Panel finds that the Athlete is deemed to have admitted the asserted violation, waived his right to a hearing and accepted all proposed consequences.

Therefore the TJD-AD Panel decides on 29 September to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. 27 June 2023.

In May 2023 the India National Anti-Doping Agency (INADA) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the bodybuilder Manpreet Singh after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances Canrenone, Clenbuterol, Stanozolol and Tamoxifen.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of India (ADDPI).

The Athlete admitted the violation and stated that he was unaware that these substances were prohibited. He argued that his sports federation had not banned these substances.

The Panel finds that the presence of prohibited substances has been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation. The Panel determines that he had not mentioned these substances on the Doping Control Form and deems that the violation was intentional.

Therefore the Panel decides on 29 September 2023 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 16 May 2023.