CAS anti-doping Division (OG Rio) AD 16/005 International Olympic Committee (IOC) v. Xinyi Chen
Related case:
FINA 2016 FINA vs Xinyi Chen
December 7, 2016
- Aquatics (swimming)
- Doping (hydrochlorothiazide)
- Duty of the athlete
- Alternative explanation
- Literal application of the WADA Technical Documents
1. Being a young, honest person and developing outstanding performance results using exclusively fair and accepted training methods neither eliminate nor diminish the athlete’s duty under the IOC Anti-Doping Rules (ADR) to ensure that no prohibited substance enters his/her body, and in case of an Adverse Analytical Finding, his/her duty to explain the source of the prohibited substance.
2. A mere assumption or speculation without any corroborating evidence does not meet the requirement of a consistent alternative explanation for the ingestion of a prohibited substance in order for a CAS panel to feel satisfied “that one of them is more likely than not having occurred”. In particular, contamination in drinking water or meat or other nutrition would most presumably lead to more than just one athlete being found with a prohibited substance in his/her body.
3. Technical Documents being part of the International Standard for Laboratories should be applied literally by laboratories.
Ms Xinyi Chen is a Chinese Athlete competing in the Women’s 100m butterly and the Women’s Freestyle event at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games.
On 10 August the IOC has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after her A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ).
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in her defence and she was heard for the CAS Anti-Doping Panel.
The Athlete asserted, sustained by expert witnesses, that a serious lack of care on the laboratory side, which was suspended by WADA already twice prior to Rio 2016, has been shown. In close, the Athlete reiterated her position, on a balance of probability, that she did not commit an ADRV noting the following:
1.) in the short time available, she tested and analysed all medication and vitamins to determine the source of the prohibited substance;
2.) she has a clean anti-doping record from numerous tests in the past;
3.) she underwent a forensic report with an expert of the Public Prosecutor Office, which confirmed and underlined her honesty; and
4.) the numerous mistakes committed by the Rio laboratory in the present case. Therefore, the Athlete should not be disqualified from the 100 m butterfly finals.
The Panel notes that the Athlete undertook enormous efforts in order to find the source for the prohibited substance in her body. None of these tested substances, however, led to any finding with respect of the source of HCTZ.
The Panel finds that as a matter of fact, no evidence on a balance of probability as required by art. 3.1 IOC ADR could be adduced by the Athlete to rebut the laboratory's analysis' result on the A and the B Sample: the presence of the prohibited substance of HCTZ in the Athlete's sample. In the opinion of the Panel there was no departure from the International Standard for Laboratories (ISL).
The Panel concludes that the IOC met the burden of proof under Art. 3.1 IOC ADR. The documents adduced by the IOC establish sufficient proof, to the comfortable satisfaction of the Panel, that the presence of the prohibited substance in the Athlete's body constitutes an ADRV under Art. 2 IOC ADR.
Therefore the CAS Anti-Doping Division Panel decides on 18 August 2016:
1.) The IOC has established the presence of a prohibited substance in accordance with Article 2.1 of the IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Olympic Games Rio 2016.
2.) The result obtained by the Athlete in the Olympic Games Rio 2016 is disqualified in accordance with Article 9 of the IOC ADR, with all resulting consequences, including forfeiture of any medals, points and prizes.
3.) In accordance with Art. 10.2.2 IOC ADR, the matter of the Athlete is referred to FINA to decide on the responsibility for result management in terms of sanctions beyond the Olympic Games Rio 2016.
