CAS 2011/A/2403 World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) v. Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique (FIG) & Anastasiya Melnychenko
- Gymnastics
- Doping (furosemide)
- Panel’s evaluation of experts working on the account of one of the parties
- Panel’s considerations before imposing the appropriate sanction on the athlete
1. When appraising conclusions raised by experts working on the account of one of the parties, a panel takes into consideration the fact that such persons are not acting as independent experts in the case.
2. An athlete bears a high responsibility in the choice of his medical attendant and caution must be exercised in the ingestion of medication. However, for an athlete of 15 years of age at the time of the offence, much of the responsibility normally accorded to the athlete must be expected of the athlete’s coaches and the federation. When considering the appropriate sanction, the panel must also consider if the decision relating to the health of the athlete had to be taken quickly, or if the athlete did ask the treating doctor whether the medication prescribed could lead to a violation and the response given was inaccurate.
In December 2010 the International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Ukrainian Athlete Anastasiya Melnychenko after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Furosemide. The Athlete admitted the use of prescribed medication Lasix when she underwent treatment in a hospital.
Consequently the FIG Disciplinary Commission decided on 25 February 2010 to impose a 2 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the decision.
Hereafter in April 2010 the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) appealed the FIG Decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). WADA requested the Panel to set aside the Appealed Decision and to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.
Undisputed in this case between the parties is that the medication Lasix was justifiably prescribed for the treatment of the Athlete's medical condition.
The Panel determines that it was justified for the FIG Disciplinary Commission to reduce the standard period of ineligibility and to exercise its discretion under Article 10.4 of the FIG Rules, however not to the extent they did.
The Panel considers that a suspension of 4 months from the date of the present award, less the 2-month ban already served would better reflect the seriousness of the offense, the fundamental responsibility of the athlete and her young age and lack of experience.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 25 August 2011:
1.) The appeal filed by WADA on 7 April 2011 against the decision issued on 25 February 2011 by the FIG Disciplinary Commission is partially upheld.
2.) The FIG Disciplinary Commission’s decision dated 25 February 2011 is set aside.
3.) Ms Anastasiya Melnychenko is sanctioned with a 4-month period of ineligibility as from the date of the present award; any period of ineligibility already served from 25 February 2011 to the date of this award shall be credited against the total period of ineligibility to be served.
4.) (…).
5.) (…).
6. All other or further claims are dismissed.
