IAAF 2019 IAAF vs Eunice Jepkirui Kirwa

14 Jun 2019

In May 2019 In February 2019 the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Kenyan Athlete Eunice Jepkirui Kirwa after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Erythropoietin (EPO). After notification the Athlete admitted the violation, waived her right to be heard, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by the IAAF. The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance claimed that the positeve test was the result of a caudal epidural injection she received. Therefore the IAAF Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) decides on 14 June 2019 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 7 May 2019.

show » details »
Type:
pdf

JJIF 2017 JJIF vs Laurence Fouillat (2)

22 Jul 2017

DECISION 1. In March 2017 the Ju-Jitsu International Federation (JJIF) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the French Athlete Laurence Fouilat after his sample, collected in June 2015, tested positive for the prohibited substance Heptaminol. After notification the Athlete failed to respond. However the French Federation for Judo, Jujitsu, Kendo and Associated Disciplines (FFJDA) reported in May 2017 that the addressed FFJDA sports officials were not aware of the Notification and therefore it was not forwarded to the Athlete. Further the FFJDA reported that the Athlete had applied for a retrospective TUE for Heptaminol which was denied by the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFDL) in January 2016. The JJIF established that the Notification by email was validly submitted to the FFJDA sports officals without indication that this Notification was not delivered. Also the JJIF deemed that the Athlete’s TUE application was an admission of the violation and an acceptance of the presence of the prohibited substance in his system. Considering the evidence in this case the JJIF found that the anti-doping rule violation was intentional and that the delays in the proceedings were not attributed to the Athlete. Therefore the JJIF decided on 23 May 2017 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 7 June 2015. _________________________________________________ DECISION 2 Hereafter in May 2017 the Athlete requested the JJIF to reconsider his case and filed a statement with evidence in his defence. The Athlete admitted the violation and denied the intentional use of the substance. He explained with medical evidence that he had used prescribed medication as treatment for his condition. He asserted that he informed his doctor that he was an Athlete subject to doping control and acknowledged that he didn’t check his medication for prohibited substances before using. The Athlete submitted that after deliberations with the FFJDA he became aware that the prescribed medication Ginkor fort was the source of the positive doping test and he applied for a retrospective TUE which was denied by the AFDL in January 2016 due to an incomplete case file. The JJIF accepts the filed medical evidence but concludes that the Athlete acted with significant fault because he failed to investigate his medication before using and afterwards applied for a TUE with an incomplete casefile. The JJIF considers that the substantial delays in the proceedings not attributed to the Athlete were already regarded in their decision of 23 May 2016. On these grounds the JJIF decides on 22 July to uphold the JJIF decision of 23 May 2016 and to dismiss the Athlete’s request for reconsideration.

show » details »
Type:
pdf

JJIF 2017 JJIF vs Laurence Fouillat (1)

23 May 2017

Related case: JJIF 2017 JJIF vs Laurence Fouillat (2) July 7, 2017 In March 2017 the Ju-Jitsu International Federation (JJIF) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the French Athlete Laurence Fouilat after his sample, collected in June 2015, tested positive for the prohibited substance Heptaminol. After notification the Athlete failed to respond. However the French Federation for Judo, Jujitsu, Kendo and Associated Disciplines (FFJDA) reported in May 2017 that the addressed FFJDA sports officials were not aware of the Notification and therefore it was not forwarded to the Athlete. Further the FFJDA reported that the Athlete had applied for a retrospective TUE for Heptaminol which was denied by the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFDL) in January 2016. The JJIF established that the Notification by email was validly submitted to the FFJDA sports officals without indication that this Notification was not delivered. Also the JJIF deems that the Athlete’s TUE application is an admission of the violation and an acceptance of the presence of the prohibited substance in his system. Considering the evidence in this case the JJIF finds that the anti-doping rule violation was intentional and that the delays in the proceedings were not attributed to the Athlete. Therefore the JJIF decides on 23 May 2017 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 7 June 2015.

show » details »
Type:
pdf

IAAF 2018 IAAF vs Felix Kiptoo Kirwa

11 Jun 2019

In February 2019 the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Kenyan Athlete Felix Kiptoo Kirwa because his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Strychnine. After notification the Athlete admitted the violation, waived his right to be heard, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by the IAAF. The Athlete explained with evidence that he had used herbal medicine products as treatment for his arthritis. These products have the ingredient Strychnos nuxvomica, which contain Strychnine, while Strychnine itself was not listed on either product. Considering the Athlete's evidence the IAAF accepts that the violation was not intentional and that presence of Strychnine in the Athlete's sample is consistent with the Athlete's ingestion of the herbal medicine products for therapeutic reasons. Further the IAAF finds that the Athlete established No Significant Fault or Negligence for a reduced sanction and demonstrated how the substance entered his system. Therefore the IAAF Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) decides on 11 June 2019 to impose a 9 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 14 February 2019.

show » details »
Type:
pdf

IOC 2018 IOC vs Jevgenij Shuklin

7 Jun 2019

Mr Jevgenij Shuklin is a Lithuanian Athlete competing in the Men’s Canoe event at the London 2012 Olympic Games. In 2018, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) decided to perform further analyses on certain samples collected during the 2012 Olympic Games. These additional analyses were performed with analytical methods which were not available in 2012. In December 2018 the International Testing Agency (ITA), on behalf of the IOC, reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his 2012 A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Dehydrochlormethyltestosterone (Turinabol). After notification the Athlete was heard for the IOC Disciplinary Commission. The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and could not explain how the substance entered his system. Further he questioned the circumstances his sample was held and stored since the 2012 Olympic Games. The Disciplinary Commission holds that the test results establish the presence of Turinabol in the Athlete’s samples and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation. In the matter of the issues raised by the Athlete regarding the analytical process, the Commission finds that they do not put the validity of the test results in question. The Commission deems that the Turinabol has been very commonly used as doping substance and found in many positive cases in the reanalysis of samples collected on the occasion of the 2012 and 2008 Olympic Games. The Commission finds that the use of this substance is therefore consistent with the intentional use of Prohibited Substances specifically ingested to deliberately improve performance. Therefore the IOC Disciplinary Commission decides on 7 June 2019 that the Athlete, Jevgenij Shuklin: 1.) is found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation pursuant to the IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Games of the XXX Olympiad in London in 2012 (presence and/or use, of Prohibited Substances or their Metabolites or Markers in the Athlete’s bodily specimen), and 2.) is disqualified from the events in which he participated upon the occasion of the 2012 Olympic Games, namely, the Men’s Canoe Sprint C-1 200m event. 3.) has the medal, diploma, and pin obtained in the Men’s Canoe Sprint C-1 200m event withdrawn and is ordered to return them. 4.) The ICF is requested to modify the results of the above-mentioned event accordingly and to consider any further action within its own competence. 5.) The National Olympic Committee of Lithuania shall ensure full implementation of this decision. 6.) The decision enters into force immediately.

show » details »
Type:
pdf

IBSF 2018 IBSF vs Aaron Victorian III

23 May 2019

In December 2018 the International Bobsleigh & Skeleton Federation (IBSF) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Canadian Athlete Aaron Victorian III after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Cocaine. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete filed a statement in his defence. In his submission the Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and explained with evidence that he had used Bolivian tea for years that contained coca leaves for his high altitude sickness. Further the Athlete requested to lift the provisional suspension which was rejected by the Anti-Doping Hearing Panel on 31 December 2018. Hereafter the Athlete failed to respond to the IBSF communications. The Panel deems that the Athlete has been given sufficient time to provide any further statement or explanation regarding the positive test and has waived his right to ask for a hearing. Considering the evidence provided by the Athlete the Panel accepts the Athlete’s explanation that the coca tea was the source of the positive test. The Panel finds that the violations was not intentional but he failed to provide any evidence about his altitude sickness nor why he never seeked medical help or tried other medical remedies to cure him. The Panel concludes that drinking coca tea without further inquiries or research cannot be considered as fulfilling a "duty of care". The Athlete did not establish in his submission that he could not, even with the exercise of the utmost caution, reasonably have suspected that he had been administered a Prohibited Substance. Therefore the IBSF Anti-Doping Hearing Panel decides on 23 May 2019 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 29 December 2018.

show » details »
Type:
pdf

IBSF 2018 IBSF vs Jazmine Fenlator-Victorian

25 Apr 2019

In March 2018 the International Bobsleigh & Skeleton Federation (IBSF) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Jazmine Fenlator-Victorian after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance clenbuterol. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. Here the Athlete asserted that contaminated supplements she used were the source of the positive test. In support analysis of this supplement in a laboratory confirmed the presence of Clenbuterol in the analyzed capsules from two separate packages. Based on the evidence the IBSF accepts that the source of clenbuterol was a contaminated nutritional supplement taken by the Athlete prior to the competition of 13 January 2018. The IBSF considers that a very small concentration of the substance was found in the Athlete’s sample and that the Athlete’s next sample provided on 25 January 2018 did not result in a positive test. Further the IBSF holds that the Athlete checked the ingredients of the supplement before using and mentioned this supplement on the Doping Control Form. Accordingly the IBSF concludes that the Athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation but established No Significant Fault or Negligence as ground for a reduced sanction. The IBSF reached an agreement with the Athlete regarding the consequences of the anti-doping rule violation into a decision under IBSF Anti-Doping Rules. Threrefore the IBSF decides on 25 April 2019 to impose a 1 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. 8 March 2019.

show » details »
Type:
pdf

IBSF 2018 IBSF vs Alexey Voevoda

8 Feb 2019

Related cases: IOC 2017 IOC vs Alexey Voevoda - Operative Part December 18, 2017 CAS 2017/A/5468 Alexey Voevoda vs IOC July 11, 2018 Two reports commissioned by WADA, published by Prof Richard McLaren on 18.07.2016 and 09.12.2016, showed detailed evidences of organised manipulation of some Russian samples collected during the Olympic Winter Games Sochi 2014. The reports describe how urine bottles were opened and urine was switched with clean modified urine coming from a “biobank”, and how urine density had to be adjusted to match that recorded on the doping control form (if different at the time of collection) by adding salt to the sample. As a result of the McLaren Reports the IOC Oswald Commission started investigations in order to establish the possible liability of individual athletes and to issue any sanctions so that decisions could be taken as far in advance of the 2018 Winter Games as possible. In the context of this Commission the IOC decided that all the samples of all Russian athletes who participated in Sochi were re-analysed. The re-analysis established whether there was doping or whether the samples themselves were manipulated. _________________________________________________ Alexey Voevoda is a Russian Athlete competing in the Men's Bobsleigh Event at the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games. In December 2016 the IOC Disciplinary Commission has reported multiple anti-doping rule violations against the Athlete for tampering, conspiracy and use of prohibited substances. Consequently the IOC Disciplinary Commission decided on 18 December 2017 to declare Alexey Voevoda ineligible to be accredited in any capacity for all editions of the Games of the Olympiad and the Olympic Winter Games subsequent to the Sochi Olympic Winter Games. Further the Commission disqualified the Athlete and his Team from the events at the 2014 Sochi Olympic Winter Games including forfeiture of any medal, diploma, medallist pin, points and prizes. ________________________________________________ In December 2017 the Athlete Alexey Voevoda appealed the IOC decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). A total of 42 cases were filed with CAS by Russian athletes (the Sochi Appellants) against the decisions taken by the IOC Disciplinary Commission in relation to the 2014 Sochi Olympic Winter Games. Having thoroughly considered the submissions of the Parties, the written evidence as well as the oral evidence and testimonies provided at the six-day hearing, the Panel finds that the Athlete committed ADRVs in the form of the use of a prohibited method, i.e. urine substitution, pursuant to Article 2.2 of the WADC in connection with M2.1 of the 2014 WADA Prohibited List, and in the form of use of a prohibited substance under Article 2.2 of the WADC. The Panel was unable to find the commission of either an ADRV in the form of tampering with doping control in accordance with Article 2.5 of the WADC or an ADRV in the form of cover-up of or complicity in an ADRV under Article 2.8 of the WADC. Based on the finding of two individual ADRVs committed by the Athlete, the Panel concludes that the imposition of a lifetime ineligibility to participate in whatever capacity in Olympic Winter Games as well as in Games of the Olympiad is not appropriate in relation to the seriousness of the individual ADRVs and, therefore, declares the Athlete ineligible to participate in any capacity for the next edition of the Olympic Winter Games, i.e. the Winter Games in PyeongChang 2018. Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 11 July 2018 that: 1.) The Appeal filed by Alexey Voevoda on 19 December 2017 against the Decision of the International Olympic Committee Disciplinary Commission dated 18 December 2017 is partially upheld. 2.) Paragraph I(a) of the Decision rendered by the International Olympic Committee Disciplinary Commission dated 18 December 2017 is modified as follows: I. The Athlete, Alexey VOEVODA: a) is found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation pursuant to the International Olympic Committee Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the XXII Olympic Winter Games in Sochi, Russia, in connection with the World Anti-Doping Code. 3.) Paragraph V of the Decision rendered by the International Olympic Committee Disciplinary Commission dated 18 December 2017 is annulled and replaced as follows: V. Alexey VOEVODA is declared ineligible to be accredited in any capacity for the next edition of the Olympic Winter Games subsequent to the Sochi Olympic Winter Games (i.e. PyeongChang 2018). 4.) The Russian Team which ranked 1st in the 4-Man Bobsleigh event is disqualified. The corresponding diplomas are withdrawn and shall be returned to the International Olympic Committee. 5.) All other rulings contained in the Decision rendered by the International Olympic Committee Disciplinary Commission dated 18 December 2017 are maintained. 6.) The award is pronounced without costs, except for the Court Office fee of CHF 1,000 (one thousand Swiss Francs) paid by Alexey Voevoda, which is retained by the CAS. 7.) Each party shall bear their own costs and other expenses incurred in connection with this arbitration. 8.) All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed. ________________________________________________ Hereafter following the findings of CAS Award 2017/A/5468 the International Bobsleigh & Skeleton Federation (IBSF) reported two anti-doping rule violations against the Athlete Alexey Voevoda: Use of a Prohibited Substance and Use of a Prohibited Method. After the notification the Athlete failed to respond to the IBSF communications. Therefore the IBSF decides on 8 February 2019 in absence of the Athlete that: 1.) Mr Alexey VOEVODA is found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation pursuant to Art. 2.2 ADR. 2.) Mr Alexey VOEVODA is declared ineligible for a period of two (2) years starting from the date of his Provisional Suspension, December 21, 2018 and therefore ending December 20, 2020; during which period he is not entitled to participate in any competition or activity. The term “activity” also includes, for example, administrative activities, such as serving as an official, director, officer, employee, or volunteer of the organization. 3.) Mr Alexey VOEVODA shall be disqualified of all competitive results since 17 February 2014. 4.) This Decision may be submitted exclusively by way of appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne, Switzerland, which will render a final decision in accordance with the Code of sports-related arbitration.

show » details »
Type:
pdf

IBSF 2017 IBSF vs Maxim Belugin - Settlement

15 Mar 2019

Related cases: IOC 2017 IOC vs Maxim Belugin - Decision March 21, 2018 IOC 2017 IOC vs Maxim Belugin - Operative Part December 22, 2017 Two reports commissioned by WADA, published by Prof Richard McLaren on 18.07.2016 and 09.12.2016, showed detailed evidences of organised manipulation of some Russian samples collected during the Olympic Winter Games Sochi 2014. The reports describe how urine bottles were opened and urine was switched with clean modified urine coming from a “biobank”, and how urine density had to be adjusted to match that recorded on the doping control form (if different at the time of collection) by adding salt to the sample. As a result of the McLaren Reports the IOC Oswald Commission started investigations in order to establish the possible liability of individual athletes and to issue any sanctions so that decisions could be taken as far in advance of the 2018 Winter Games as possible. In the context of this Commission the IOC decided that all the samples of all Russian athletes who participated in Sochi were re-analysed. The re-analysis established whether there was doping or whether the samples themselves were manipulated. ________________________________________________ Maxim Belugin is a Russian Athlete competing in the Men's Bobsleigh Events at the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games. In April 2017 the IOC Disciplinary Commission reported multiple anti-doping rule violations against the Athlete for tampering, conspiracy and for testing positive for the prohibited substances Metenolone and Trenbolone. Here the Disciplinary Commission deemed - based on the investigations, the evidence and findings - that the participation of the Athlete in the doping scheme is established to its comfortable satisfaction. The Disciplinary Commission concluded that it is more than comfortably satisfied that the Athlete committed the anti-doping rule violations and he was a participant in, and a beneficiary of, the cover up scheme implemented on the occasion of the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games. Therefore the IOC Disciplinary Commission decided on 21 March 2018 that the Athlete Maxim Belugin is found to have committed anti-doping rule violations upon the occasion of the XXII Olympic Winter Games in Sochi. The athlete and his team were disqualified from the events in which he participated at the Games and all medals won by him and his team were forfeited. The athlete was also declared ineligible to participate in any capacity in all subsequent editions of the Olympic Games. Hereafter on 15 March 2019 the Athlete and the International Bobsleigh & Skeleton Federation (IBSF) reached an agreement regarding the consequences of the anti-doping rule violatons established by the IOC. The agreement included, that: 1.) Mr. Belugin accepts the charge of a commission of an ADRV for the Presence of Metenolone and/or Trenbolone in his A and B Samples no 2891900 in violation of Article 2.1 IBSF ADR. 2.) Mr. Belugin accepts as a sanction a period of ineligibility of two (2) years starting from February 23rd 2019, from which the period of Provisional Suspension, which was imposed on 8 June 2017, shall be deducted. 3.) Mr. Belugin shall be disqualified of all competitive results since 15 February 2014. 4.) The IBSF will no longer pursue the allegation of Tampering and/ or Cover up/Complicity. 5.) The Agreement may be submitted exclusively by way of appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne, Switzerland, which will render a final decision in accordance with the Code of sports-related arbitration.

show » details »
Type:
pdf

IAAF Taskforce Report to the IAAF Council about the Russian Athletics Federation (RusAF) - 8 June 2019

8 Jun 2019

IAAF Taskforce report to Council, 8 June 2019 / Rune Andersen. - International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF). - Monaco : IAAF, 2019 _________________________________________________ The IAAF Council announced that there had been no change in status of the Russian Athletics Federation (RusAF). Reporting to the IAAF Council at its meeting in Monaco, Rune Andersen, the independent chairman of the IAAF Taskforce, said that while some progress has been made, key issues remain outstanding that prevent reinstatement of RusAF. One criteria has been met, Andersen reported: payment by (RusAF) of all expenses incurred during the Russian crisis, which has totaled US$3.2 million to date. A second criteria, he added, is close to being met: receipt of the analytical data and any samples that the AIU needs from the Moscow lab in order to determine which athletes have a case to answer under the IAAF anti-doping rules. "As soon as the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) receives the data from WADA it will review to confirm it has everything it needs," Andersen said. But Andersen said the task force noted recent allegations that RUSAF officials were involved in an attempt to cover up a doping offence by one of their athletes and that banned coaches and a banned doctor continue to work with athletes. "That calls into question whether RUSAF is able to enforce doping bans, and whether all RUSAF athletes have embraced the change to a new anti-doping culture proclaimed by RUSAF, both of which are conditions for reinstatement. The AIU will be looking into this. “The Task Force shares Council's frustration that progress in two areas is being undermined in apparent back-sliding in two other areas. [The Task Force] hopes the outstanding issues can be resolved soon. If and when they are, it will report that back at its Council meeting in Doha in September, if not before.”

show » details »
Type:
pdf
Category
  • Legal
  • Education
  • Science
  • Statistics
  • History
Country & language
  • Country
  • Language
Other filters
  • ADRV
  • Legal Terms
  • Sport/IFs
  • Other organisations
  • Laboratories
  • Analytical aspects
  • Doping classes
  • Substances
  • Medical terms
  • Various
  • Version
  • Document category
  • Document type
Publication period
Origin