CAS 2008/A/1607 Kaisa Varis v. International Biathlon Union (IBU)
CAS 2008/A/1607 Varis v/ IBU
- Biathlon
- Doping (EPO)
- Second violation of an anti-doping rule
- Right to attend or have the athlete’s representative attend the B’ sample opening and analysis
An athlete’s right to be given a reasonable opportunity to observe the opening and testing of a “B” sample is of sufficient importance that needs to be enforced even in situations where all of the other evidence available indicates that the Appellant committed an anti-doping rule violation. Especially in cases where the Athlete is facing a lifetime ban as the result of an alleged anti-doping rule violation and because of the significance of the consequences of such ban for the Athlete, it is important that procedures are followed correctly and that information concerning the rights and remedies of an athlete is communicated clearly.
On 11 February 2008 the International Biathlon Union (IBU) decided to impose a lifetime ban on the Athlete Kaisa Varis as a second violation after her A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance erythropoietin (EPO).
Previously in May 2003 the Athlete was sanctioned for 2 years also after she tested positive for erythropoietin (EPO).
Hereafter in July 2008 both the Athlete and the IBU appeald this decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
The athlete asserts that the decision of the IBU Executive Board should be overruled and either
- (a) the Appellant’s B sample taken in a doping test on 6 January 2008 in Oberhof, Germany, should be analysed in accordance with IBU Anti-Doping Rules section 7.2.3e (WADA Code, section 7.2) in the presence of the Appellant’s “biochemical” representative; or
- (b) if that were not possible, the sanctions imposed by the IBU should be declared null and void.
Following assessment of the case the CAS Panel determines that an athlete’s right to be given a reasonable opportunity to observe the opening and testing of a “B” sample is of sufficient importance that it needs to be enforced even in situations where all of the other evidence available indicates that the Appellant committed an anti-doping rule violation.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 13 March 2009:
1.) The appeal filed by Ms Kaisa Varis on 15 July 2008 is allowed.
2.) The decision rendered by the IBU Executive Board on 11 February 2008 is annulled.
(…)
