Related case:
SAIDS 2018_36 Mamorolla Tjoka vs SAIDS - Appeal
July 18, 2023
In June 2019 the South African Institute for Drugfree Sport (SAIDS) reported anti-doping rule violations against the Lesotho Athlete Mamorallo Tjoka for Tampering and Evasion of sample collection. Following notification the Athlete filed a statement in her defence and failed to attend the hearing of the SAIDS Disciplinary Panel.
Three Doping Control Officers (DCOs) testified that on 7 October 2018 they established that the Athlete was present in the house of her aunt in Lesotho and after introduction they notified her about the sample collection. Before the sample collection could commence the Athlete went to another room and thereupon the DCOs discovered that the Athlete had left the house and disappeared.
In her submissions the Athlete contradicted the statements of the DCOs and denied that she had been in the house of her aunt in Lesotho on 7 October 2018. She stated that she was in Johannesburg that day and involved in a car accident. After delays she produced an incident report and relevant passport information.
SAIDS and the South African Police opened several investigations into the Athlete which revealed that the Athlete’s car accident on 7 October in Johannesburg was a fabrication. Cell phone data and other evidence confirmed that at the time of the alleged incident on 7 October 2018 she clearly was at her aunt’s house in Lesotho and not in Johannesburg.
Furthermore it appeared that all the people involved in this alleged car accident had provided false statements. Cell phone data showed that they knew each other and that there had been communications between them. In fact the cell phone data established de specific locations of these people and none of them were even close to the point of the alleged car accident on that day.
Considering the evidence in this case the Disciplinary Panel finds that the Athlete had committed the reported anti-doping rule violations and it rejected the false evidence she had produced in support of her assertions.
Because this is the Athlete’s second anti-doping rule violation the SAIDS Disciplinary Panel decides on 16 August 2019 to impose an 8 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date she evaded the sample collection, i.e. on 7 October 2018.
Due to the Athlete's dishonest conduct the Panel deemed that the SAIDS’ costs for the results management, the conducted investigations and the legal costs shall be borne by the Athlete.
