CAS 2014/A/3734 World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) v. Vladislav Lukanin & International Weightlifting Federation (IWF)
- Weightlifting
- Doping (epioxandrolone; 18-nor-oxandrolone)
- Sanction for second anti-doping rule violation
In circumstances where an athlete, following a second anti-doping rule violation, receives a sanction for a first anti-doping rule violation due to the fact that the anti-doping panel in charge of the second anti-doping rule violation had not been informed of the first anti-doping rule violation the athlete may – on appeal for example by the World Anti-Doping Agency – ultimately receive a sanction adequate for a second anti-doping rule violation. If the period of ineligibility then imposed on the athlete is backdated to the end of the first imposed period of ineligibility, any results of the athlete achieved between the end of the first imposed period of ineligibility and the date of the second decision have to be disqualified. The reason for this is that it would be contrary to fairness and common sense for the athlete to be able to retain the benefit of his results over the period from the end of the first imposed period of ineligibility while at the same time having the benefit of counting the same period as a part of his period of ineligibility.
In 26 November 2004 the International Weightlifting Federation (IWF) decided to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete Vladislav Lukanin after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance human Chorionic Gonadotrophin (hCG).
In May 2011 the IWF reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance oxandrolone. The Athlete admitted the use of supplements purchased from the internet.
As a result on 24 november the IWF Doping Hearing Panel (DHP) decided to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 13 May 2011.
The DHP imposed the sanction as first anti-doping rule violation and wasn’t informed about the Athlete’s previous anti-doping violation in 2003. With lex mitior due to modified rules of the IWF Anti-Doping Policy (ADP) the IWF Executive Committee decided in October 2012 to reduce the Athlete’s sanction from 4 year to 2 years ending on 13 May 2013.
After delays due to incomplete case files WADA appealed the IWF decision of 8 September 2014 with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). WADA requested the Sole Arbitrator to set aside the IWF decision and to impose a 8 year ineligibility period or a lifetime ban on the Athlete.
WADA argued that IWF made several failures and under the IWF ADP Rules the Athlete had committed multiple violations due to his second anti-doping rule violation in April 2011 occurred within the 8 year period after he had committed the first anti-doping rule violation in November 2003.
The Sole Arbitrator agrees that after the second violation in April 2011 the Athlete had committed multiple anti-doping rule violations within the 8 year period under the IWF ADP Rules. As a consequence the IWF Doping Hearing Panel had to impose a 8 year period of ineligibility or a lifetime ban on the Athlete and without lex mitior reduction of the sanction.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 16 December 2012 that:
1.) The Decision of the IWF Doping Hearing Panel issued on 7 November 2011 is varied in that in place of a period of four years ineligibility a period of eight years ineligibility is imposed on the Athlete, such period to be calculated from 13 May 2011.
2.) The decision of the IWF Executive Board contained in its letter dated 29 October 2012 is declared void.
3.) All competitive individual results obtained by the Athlete from 13 April 2011 are disqualified (including forfeiture of any medals, points and prizes).
4.) IWF shall pay a contribution of CHF 3,000 (three thousand Swiss Francs) towards the costs of WADA incurred in connection with these arbitration proceedings.
5.) All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.
