Related case:
SAIDS 2014_31 SAIDS vs Joseph Mphuthi
August 20, 2015
On 20 August 2015 the SAIDS Anti-Doping Hearing Panel decided to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete after his A an B samples tested positive for the prohibited substances 19-norandrosterone and 19-noretiocholanolone (Nandrolone).
In this case the Anti-Doping Hearing Panel considered the substantial delays not attributed to the Athlete and the procedural errors made by SAIDS when it reported that the Athlete had participated in two major events while under provisional suspension since March 2015. The Panel concluded regarding the provisional suspension that the SAIDS letter of notification to the Athlete in March 2015 was ambiguously vague and therefore capable of being misunderstood and misinterpred and not in accordance with the Rules. As a result the Panel decided to start the period of ineligibility on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 12 April 2014.
Hereafter in September 2015 SAIDS appealed the decision of the Anti-Doping Hearing Panel with the Appeal Tribunal. SAIDS asserted that the period of ineligibility should start on the date of the disciplinary hearing (8 July 2015) and not on the date of the sample collection (12 April 2015). In this matter SAIDS argued that the Athlete was duly notified in March 2015 about the anti-doping violation and the provisional suspension. Also after the formal notification in June 2015 the process was expedited efficiently.
The Appeal Tribunal agrees that the Anti-Doping Hearing Panel erred to set the commencement of the ineligibility period on the date of the sample collection. Further the Appeal Tribunal finds that in spite of the delays the Athlete didn’t suffer from undue prejudice.
Therefore the SAIDS Appeal Tribunal decides on 11 February 2016 to set the commencement of the Athlete's period of ineligiblility on the date of the hearing, i.e. on 8 July 2015.
