CAS 2012/A/2791 World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) v. Norjannah Hafiszah Jamaludin, Nurul Sarah Abdul Kadir, Mohamad Noor Imran Hadi, Siti Zubaidah Adabi, Siti Fatimah Mohamad, Yee Yi Ling, Harun Rasheed & Malaysia Athletic Federation (MAF)
CAS 2012/A/2791 WADA vs
- Norjannah Hafiszah Jamaludin (Athlete 1)
- Nurul Sarah Abdul Kadir (Athlete 2)
- Mohamad Noor Imran Hadi (Athlete 3)
- Siti Zubaidah Adabi (Athlete 4)
- Siti Fatimah Mohamad (Athlete 5)
- Yee Yi Ling (Athlete 6)
- Harun Rasheed (The Coach)
- Malaysia Athletic Federation (MAF)
Athletics
Doping (refusing to submit to sample collection)
Obedience to a higher authority as compelling justification
Personal responsibility of an athlete or a coach
Cultural differences in attitude towards authority
Anti-doping violation by a member of the athlete’s entourage (coach)
Substantial assistance
Aggravating circumstances
1. The fact of an athlete feeling obliged to avoid an anti-doping test due to having received instructions to do so from a coach and/or a manager and/or another member of his/her entourage and/or an official whose authority he/she must normally respect – under the threat that any disobedience would lead to reprisals affecting the athlete’s rights to train and compete in a normal manner – cannot, in principle, be deemed a compelling justification, since an athlete will normally be able to and should take the responsibility of denouncing any such threats to a superior authority at national and/or international level.
2. The anti-doping system codified by the World Anti-Doping Code is predicated on the personal responsibility of individual athletes, which encompasses the responsibility of understanding anti-doping rules and resisting any undue pressures to violate them in any manner. The same is also applicable, mutatis mutandis, for a coach.
3. Differences in attitude towards authority stemming from cultural diversity may not stand in the way of a uniform application of anti-doping rules, since the rules represent a world-wide international system for regulating and fighting doping in sport that cannot afford to account for national or regional particularities. Allowing the contrary would lead to differences of treatment between sports and/or athletes that would undermine the level playing field, which is one of the fundaments of fairness in sporting competitions.
4. Whether or not submitting to the orders of a higher authority, a coach clearly commits an anti-doping violation by first instructing athletes to bring samples of urine of other persons and then participating in instructing them not to take part in an anti-doping control.
5. The assistance in discovering or establishing an anti-doping violation is substantial if it represents an early piece of evidence that partakes in enabling the national association to establish an anti-doping violation by one of its officials and allows to uncover a very serious doping scheme that had developed within the national association.
6. Deceptive and obstructive actions by athletes or members of athletes’ entourage aimed at covering up systematic and widespread doping practices of a serious nature (because of the type of products involved) are aggravating circumstances that may lead to the highest possible sanction, i.e. to a life ban.
In October 2012 Karim Ibrahim, the Malaysian Athletic Federation (MAF) deputy president, was suspended for 6 years by the MAF after being found guilty of doping offences. In addition he was forced out of his roles as vice president of the Malacca Athletic Association and as council member of the Asian Athletic Association.
Karim Ibrahim told athlete Mohd Yunus Lasaleh to take pills from a Bulgarian doctor which the official claimed were vitamins, only for the athlete to test positive for metandienone at the South East Asian Games in November 2011. As sanction athlete Yunus and his team mates were then stripped of the their gold medal they won in Indonesia. In this case, the national head coach Harun Rasheed, as instructed by Karim, told six sprinters not to give urine samples when requested by the National Sports Institute of Maylasia (NSIM) in May 2011.
Previously in June 2011 the Anti-Doping Agency of Maylasia (ADAMAS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the 6 Athletes for having refused or failed without compelling justification to submit to sample collection after notification.
Hereafter the Malaysian Athletics Union (MAF) made no further action for a period of 4 months.
After deliberations the MAF decided on 2 February 2012 to sanction the Athletes with a warning and to suspend the Coach for a period of 1 year starting on 12 September 2011.
On 8 February 2012, two petitions were filed, one signed by 42 athletes, the other by 6 coaches, to request an independent enquiry into the circumstances surrounding the doping issue that had arisen and in particular the role played by the Deputy President of MAF and Coaching Chairman Karim Ibrahim.
As a result of the report, issued by the Independent Committee, Karim Ibrahim was suspended for six years after being found guilty of doping offences.
In May 2012 WADA appealed the MAF decision with CAS.
The six athletes admitted that the intentionally refused to submit to doping test of 24 May 2011. They were notified of the doping test at the NSIM, while the medical examination was being conducted. They all decide, after having received instruction to that effect from the Coach and/or Karim Ibrahim, not to submit to the doping test of that day.
The Panel notes that before the Deputy President Karim Ibrahim of the MAF got directly involved, the six athletes were prepared to go very far to conceal the possible presence of prohibited substances in their bodily system, since all of them have admitted that they were prepared to bring another person’s urine to the medical examination, upon the mere request of their Coach.
The Panel finds that Site Fatimah Mohamad (Athlete 5) has provided substantial assistance to the MAF with facts concerning a cover-up of the doping practices in which the Deputy President Ibrahim was deeply involved. Athlete 5 made a recording during the meeting between the Athletes the Coach and Karim Ibrahim on 24 May 2011. This recording was handed over to the MAF and it was one element in the further investigation regarding the doping practices within MAF and Deputy President Karim Ibrahim.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport Panel decides on 24 May 2013 that:
1.) The appeal of the World Anti-Doping Agency filed on 7 May 2012 is upheld.
2.) The decision of the Malaysia Athletic Federation rendered on 2 February 2012 is set aside.
3.) Norjannah Hafiszah Jamaludin, Nurul Sarah Abdul Kadir, Mohamad Noor Imran Hadi, Siti Zubaidah Adabi and Yee Yi Ling are sanctioned with a 2 year period of ineligibility, which shall commence on the date of this award.
4.) Siti Fatirnah Mohamad (Athlete 5) is sanctioned with an 18 month period of ineligibility, which shall commence on the date of this award.
5.) The Coach Harun Rasheed is sanctioned with a 10 year period of ineligibility, which commenced on 12 September 2011.
6.) All competitive results obtained by Norjannah Hafiszah Jamaludin, Nurul Sarah Abdul Kadir, Mohamad Noor Imran Hadi, Siti Zubaidah Adabi, Siti Fatirnah Mohamad and Yee Yi Ling from 24 May 2011 until the date of this award shall be disqualified, with all the resulting consequences including forfeiture of any medals, points, prizes and appearance money.
7.) The costs of arbitration, to be calculated by the CAS Court Office and communicated separately to the parties, shall be borne entirely by the Malaysia Athletic Federation.
8.) The Malaysia Athletic Federation is ordered to pay to the World Anti-Doping Agency a contribution towards its legal fees and other expenses incurred in connection with the present arbitration procedure in an amount of CHF 5,000 (five thousand Swiss Francs). The other parties shall bear their own legal fees and other expenses.
9.) All other prayers for relief are dismissed.
