CAS 2018/A/5796 Ahmed Abdelhak v. International Handball Federation (IHF)
- Handball
- Doping (19-norandrosterone; 19-noretiocholanolone)
- Burden of proof for absence of intent in case of non-specified substance
- Intent
- Burden of proof for source of prohibited substance
1. In case of an adverse analytical finding (AAF) in an athlete’s sample of a prohibited substance not classified as a “Specified Substance” by the 2017 WADA Prohibited List (e.g. nandrolone and its metabolites), the athlete does not have the benefit of the doubt when it comes to whether or not his/her anti-doping rule violation (ADRV) was intentional in nature. Consequentially, the athlete must establish that s/he did not commit the ADRV intentionally; the standard of proof applicable to the athlete’s discharge of his/her burden in this respect is a balance of probability.
2. The requirement of ‘intent’ is satisfied by a situation in which there was a significant risk that an athlete’s conduct might constitute or result in an anti-doping rule violation and the athlete manifestly disregarded that risk.
3. In order to establish the source of the prohibited substance it is not sufficient for the athlete to protest innocence and to suggest that the substance must have entered his/her body inadvertently from some contaminated food or water. Rather, the athlete must adduce concrete, actual and credible evidence to prove the origin of a prohibited substance. While the CAS has on occasion held that it may be possible to disprove intent without proving the manner in which the substance entered an athlete’s body, it has also stressed that this would likely occur only in the rarest of cases. Furthermore, to accept mere speculation that the substance is present as a result of hypothetical contamination would be to lower the bar well below the threshold of the athlete’s duty to ensure that no prohibited substances enter his/her body.
On 13 April 2018 the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of the International Handball Federation (IHF) decided to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Qatari handballer Ahmed Abdelhak after he tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone and 19-noretiocholanolone (Nandrolone).
Hereafter in May 2018 the Athlete appealed the IHF decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The Athlete requested the Panel to set aside the IHF decision and to impose a reduced sanction.
The Athlete accepted the test results and denied the intentional use of the substances. He claimed that the ingestion of a contaminated product had caused the positive test and he acknowleged a certain level of negligence due to his lack of anti-doping education.
The IHF contended that the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation and failed to establish how the prohibited substance had entered his system, nor that the violation was not intentional. He also failed to demonstrate that he acted without significant fault or negligence.
Considering the evidence in this case the Sole Arbitrator concludes that the Athlete has been unable to prove that the prohibited substance entered his system entirely unintentionally, or otherwise prove lack of intent.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 27 December 2018 that:
1.) The appeal filed by Ahmed Abdelhak on 3 May 2018 is dismissed.
2.) The decision of the International Handball Federation Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel dated 13 April 2018 and suspending Ahmed Abdelhak for a period of ineligibility of four years, expiring at midnight on 23 January 2021, is confirmed.
(…)
5.) All other or further motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.
