CAS 2017/O/5389 International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) v. Russian Athletic Federation (RUSAF) & Kseniya Agafonova
- Athletics (middle & long distance)
- Doping (dehydrochlormethyltestosterone, DHCMT)
- CAS jurisdiction under Article 38.3 IAAF Rules
- Version of the regulations applicable
- Determination of the sanction
1. In circumstances where an IAAF member federation is prevented from convening and completing a hearing involving an international-level athlete within the deadline set by Rule 38.3 of the IAAF Competition Rules (the “IAAF Rules”), e.g. because it is suspended from IAAF activities, the IAAF is permitted to refer the matter directly to a sole arbitrator appointed by CAS, subject to an appeal to CAS in accordance with Rule 42 of the IAAF Rules. Indeed, these proceedings are based on a request for arbitration for the conduct of a first instance hearing and do not involve an appeal against a decision rendered by a sports-related body. In case of an appeal to the CAS, it is Rule 38.3 of the IAAF Rules that establish the jurisdiction of CAS.
2. Pursuant to the legal principle of tempus regit actum, the procedural aspects of the proceedings shall be subject to the rules applicable at the time of the proceedings. The substantive matters, that is the athlete’s anti-doping rule violation, shall be subject to the rules in place at the time of the alleged anti-doping rule violation subject to the possible application of the principle of lex mitior.
3. An athlete shall be sanctioned with a two-year period of Ineligibility under the 2009 IAAF Rules for the presence of a non-specified substance such as DHCMT metabolites where no mitigating circumstances were filed regarding the length of the sanction and no explanation for the presence of the prohibited substance was provided.
Ms Kseniya Agafonova is a Russian middle- and long-distance runner competing at the 2009 Berlin IAAF World Championships.
In 2017 the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) decided to perform further analyses on certain samples collected during the 2009 Berlin IAAF World Championships.
As a result in September 2017 the IAAF reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after her 2009 sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Dehydrochloromethyltestosterone (Turinabol).
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the case was referred in November 2017 to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) for a Sole Arbitrator first instance hearing panel.
The IAAF contended that the presence of the prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete’s sample and accordingly that the Athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation. The IAAF requested to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete under the IAAF ADR 2009 Rules and considering the principle of fairness regarding the disqualification of her results between 15 August 2009 until 14 August 2011.
Although duly invited, neither RusAF or the Athlete responded in this arbitration.
Considering that the Athlete has not disputed the test results, the Sole Arbitrator is comfortably satisfied that the Athlete has committed an anti-doping rule violation and that she shall be sanctioned with a 2 year period of ineligibility under the 2009 IAAF Rules. As a matter of fairness the Sole Arbitrator considers it justified to disqualify all of the Athlete’s results from 15 August 2009 to 14 August 2011.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 27 April 2018 that:
1.) The Request for Arbitration filed by the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) on 3 November 2017 is upheld.
2.) Ms Kseniya Agafonova, is responsible for the anti-doping rule violation contemplated by Article 32.2.(a) of the 2009 IAAF Competition Rules.
3.) Ms Kseniya Agafonova, is imposed the sanction of Ineligibility for two (2) years starting from 29 September 2017.
4.) All competitive results of Ms. Kseniya Agafonova, from 15 August 2009 to 14 August 2011 are disqualified, with all resulting consequences (including forfeiture of any titles, awards, medals, profits, prizes, and appearance money).
5.) (…).
6.) (…).
7.) All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.
