CAS 2012/A/3046 Amine Laalou vs FRMA & IAAF
TAS 2012/A/3046 Monsieur Amin Laalou c/ Fédération Royal Marocaine d' Athlétisme (FRMA) & Association Internationale des Fédérations d 'Athlétisme (IAAF)
In August 2012 the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Moroccan Athlete Amine Laalou after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance furosemide.
Requested by the IAAF the Laboratory also tested the Athlete’s sample for recombinant human erythropoietin (rhEPO) but the analysis did not show the presence of this substance.
On 23 October 2012 the Disciplinary Commission of the Royal Moroccan Athletics Federation (FRMA) decided to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.
Hereafter in December 2012 the Athlete appealed the FRMA decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
The Athlete requested the Panel to set aside the FRMA decision of 23 October 2012 and to impose a reduced sanction. He explained that the prescribed medication Lasilix was administered by his doctor as treatment for a leg swelling he suffered in July 2012.
He asserted that his doctor had reassured him that this medication not contained a prohibited substance. Also, he argued that there is no evidence that the substance was used to mask the presence of a substance as rhEPO because the Laboratory had reported that the probable presence of rhEPO was not demonstrated in his sample.
The IAAF contended that the Athlete gave different explanations about the medication and argued that the use of Lasilix is inadequate as treatment for the Athlete’s injury and more likely used for masking the presence of substances as rhEPO. Also as an experienced Athlete he failed to research the ingredients of the medication before it was use.
The Sole Arbitrator finds that the Athlete gave contradictory explanations and the medical explanations of the doctor for prescribing Lasilix as treatment are not consistent with those of the heard experts. The Sole Arbitrator concludes the Athlete acted negligence with the medication and there is a clear suspicion of EPO based on the Athlete’s test results.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 15 November 2013 to dismiss the Athlete’s appeal and to uphold the FRMA decision of 23 October 2012 for imposing a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.
