TAS 2006/A/1038 Joseph N’Sima / FIBA & AMA
CAS 2006/A/1038 Joseph N'Sima vs FIBA & WADA
Related case:
FIBA 2006 Joseph N’Sima & WADA vs FIBA – Appeal
January 16, 2006
In October 2004 Antidoping Norge (Anti-Doping Norway) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Joseph N’Sima after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Ephedrine.
The Athlete had already left Norway and joined a basketball club in France. Therefore in January the case was transferred from Antidoping Norge to the International Basketball Federation (FIBA).
After notification by FIBA the Athlete was heard for the FIBA Commission. The FIBA Commission concluded that the Athlete has committed an anti-doping rule violation due to he acted negligently using supplements, which contained the prohibited substance.
Without intention to enhance sport performance and due to the substantial delays in this case, the FIBA Commission decided on 13 October 2005 to impose a 12 week period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the decision until 31 December 2005.
Hereafter the Athlete and WADA appealed the FIBA Commission Decision of 13 October 2005 with the FIBA Appeals Commission.
The Athlete argued that there were irregularities in the sample collection. However the Athlete has no conclusive explanation for the positive doping test, due to the various medication and supplements he used.
WADA requested to set aside the FIBA Commission Decision of 13 October 2005 and to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete. WADA argued that the Athlete has not established that the use of the substance was not intentional.
The Sole Arbitrator considered in this case:
- the circumstances of the offence;
- the degree of guilt; the Athlete’s financial and personal circumstances;
- the long period between the sample collection and the punishment for the anti-doping rule violation;
- the first violation by the Athlete; and
- his cooperation during the proceedings.
Therefore the Sole Arbitrator of the FIBA Appeals Commission decides:
1.) The appeal by the Athlete is dismissed.
2.) The WADA appeal is upheld and the FIBA Commission Decision of 13 October 2005 is set aside.
3.) A 2 year period of ineligibility is imposed on the Athlete, starting on 13th October 2005.
4.) In application of Art. 6.8.3.1 of the Internal Regulations the FIBA Appeals Commission Panel orders that the execution of the sanction in excess of one year be suspended.
5.) The FIBA and the Athlete shall bear the costs of the proceedings.
In Februay 2006 the Athlete appealed the decision of the 16 January 2006 with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
The Athlete argued that there had been irregularities with the doping control procedure and that he acted without fault or negligence.
The CAS Panel finds that the Athlete failed to demonstrat that there were irregularities with the doping control procedure. He also failed to establish how the prohibited substance had entered his system.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport Panel decides on 4 December 2006 to uphold the decision of the FIBA Appeals Commission of 16 January 2006 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete with 1 year suspenended.
