Related case:
SAIDS 2012_05 SAIDS vs Johan Pieterse
March 6, 2012
On 6 March 2012 the SAIDS Disciplinary Committee decided to impose a 4 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete for committing an anti-doping rule violation after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine).
WADA appealed this SAIDS decision to impose a 4 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete.
The Athlete stated regarding to the supplement he performed an internet search on the WADA and SAIDS website and the results did not cause any alarm as in fact the searches showed no results.
WADA argued that the WADA website contains a warning: “Extreme caution is recommended regarding supplement use”. In addition the WADA website warns that “the misuse of supplements and taking a poorly labelled dietary supplement is not an adequate defence in a doping hearing”.
The Appeal Tribunal concludes that the athlete voluntarily took a performance enhancing supplement with the precise aim of enhancing his performance. He was on guard as to the potential risks but still apparently satisfied himself with scant and inadequate internet checks. In addition the athlete failed to disclose his use of the supplement on the Doping Control Form.
The Anti-Doping Appeal Tribunal of South Africa decides as follows:
1.) The Appeal of WADA is admissible.
2.) The decision rendered by the SAIDS Anti-Doping Disciplinary Committee on 6 March 2012 is set aside.
3.) The Athlete is sanctioned with a 2 period of ineligibility starting on the 20th September 2012. Any period of ineligibility, whether imposed on, or voluntarily accepted by the Athlete before such date shall be credited against the total period of ineligibility to be served.
4.) No order is made as to costs
