Related cases:
- TJD-AD 2021-003 Disciplinary Decision - Football
April 22, 2021 - TJD-AD 2021-017 Appeal Decision - Football
June 30, 2021 - TJD-AD 2021-027 Appeal Decision - Football
November 12, 2021
In November 2019 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the football player after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Dexamethasone. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered in June 2020. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD).
The Athlete admitted the violation and denied the intentional use of the substance. He explained with medical evidence that he had received medication for his injury, which was administered by a physiotherapist. The Athlete nor the club's doctor were aware that the physiotherapist possibly had administered a medication containing a prohibited substance.
Thereupon his football club and its doctor confirmed the administration of the substance Cytoneurin to the Athlete on the date of the Doping Control.
ABCD contended that the Athlete was unable to establish how the substance had entered his system because the medication Cytoneurin does not contain Dexamethasone and there was evidence that this medication was purchased by the club 23 days after the sample collection.
The TJD-AD Rapporteur finds that the presence of the prohibited substance had been established and accordingly that the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation.
The Rapporteur considers that the Athlete was tested before without issues, had cooperated with the investigations and that there had been substantial delays in the proceedings not attributed to the Athlete.
In view of the evidence and circumstances in this case the Rapporteur finds it plausible that the Athlete's violation was not intentional and that he had demonstrated how the substance had entered his system. Although there were grounds for No Significant Fault or Negligence, the Panel was devided in accepting the evidence in favour of the Athlete.
Therefore the TJD-AD decides by majority on 27 September 2021 to impose a 2 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 12 August 2019. The Athlete already had served this period of ineligibility.
