CAS 2020_A_6763 Trinidad and Tobago Olympic Committee (TTOC) v. World Athletics

In August 2019 the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) for World Athletics reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Ms Michelle-Lee Ahye from Trinidad and Tobago for having 3 Missed Tests within a 12 month period: in June 2018, February 2019 and in April 2019. 

In First Instance before the Disciplinary Tribunal the Athlete accepted that the First and Second Missed Tests amounted to breaches of World Athletics Rules. As to the Third Missed Test the Athlete stated that she was at home on 19 April 2019 but had not heard the doorbell or the knocking on the door or the telephone.

Contrary to the Athlete's statement the Doping Control Officer (DCO) reported that during the 60-minute time slot he knocked on her door 36 times and rang the bell 12 times while he also telephoned her twice.

Although the Athlete offered a number of reasons, the Tribunal concluded that she failed to demonstrate that she didn’t acted negligently for her failure to be available for testing on 19 April 2019. Consequently the Disciplinary Tribunal decided on 7 January 2020 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of Third Missed Test, i.e. 19 April 2019. 

Hereafter in February 2020 the Trinidad and Tobago Olympic Committee (TTOC) appealed the Decision of 7 January 2020 with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The Sole Arbitrator rendered a decision based on the written submissions of the Parties. 

The TTOC on behalf of the Athlete did not dispute the First Missed Test but did address the Second and Third Missed Tests. The TTOC argued that the Athlete was not to blame for the Second Missed Test then it follows that the Second Missed test should not be taken into account as a violation, with the result that no anti-doping rule violation has been committed, or that no fault or negligence to be attributed to the Athlete regarding to the Second Missed Test. 

As to the Third Missed Test the TTOC asserted that in First Instance the Tribunal erred in law when it found that the World Athletics did discharge its burden of proof at the requisite standard in relation to the actions of the DCO in question. The TTOC claimed that the DCO did not do all that was reasonable necessary to locate the Athlete and that he failed to act in accordance with the applicable Guidelines. 

The Sole Arbitrator concludes that the Athlete has committed three Missed Tests within a 12-month period (commencing 23 June 2018). Having taken into account the nature and circumstances of the Three Missed Tests, and the evidence on each of them proffered by the Athlete, the Sole Arbitrator finds that the decision of the Disciplinary Tribunal was correct in applying a 2 year period of ineligibility from the date of the Third Missed Test (being 19 April 2019).

Further he finds that there is no reason to grant a reduction of the period of ineligibility. In the Sole Arbitrator's view, there is nothing about the degree of fault on the part of the Athlete that commends itself to a reduction of sanction. 

Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 24 February 2021 that:

1. The appeal filed by the Trinidad and Tobago Olympic Committee against World Athletics with the Court of Arbitration for Sport on 10 February 2020 is dismissed in its entirety.
2. The decision of the Disciplinary Tribunal dated 7 January 2020 is confirmed.
3. The Award is pronounced without costs, except for the Court Office fee of CHF 1,000 (onethousand Swiss Francs) paid by the Trinidad and Tobago Olympic Committee, which is retainedby the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
4. The Trinidad and Tobago Olympic Committee shall make a contribution of CHF 3000 (threethousand Swiss francs) to the legal costs and other expenses incurred by World Athletics in connection with these proceedings.
5. All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.

Raport de Activitate 2020 / National Anti-Doping Agency of Romania. - Bucharest : Agenţia Naţională Anti-Doping (ANAD), 2021

Libido as a motivator for starting and restarting non-prescribed anabolic androgenic steroid use among men : a mixed-methods study / Orlanda Harvey, Margarete Parrish, Edwin van Teijlingen, Steven Trenoweth. - (Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy 2021, 25 February)

• DOI: 10.1080/09687637.2021.1882940

Abstract

Anabolic Androgenic Steroids (AAS) are commonly used for their anabolic effects and the potentially detrimental consequences are well documented. Most studies focus on the motivations of increased muscle development and report increased libido as a secondary motivation. This paper aims to explore users’ reports of libido as a motivator for starting and restarting AAS use. This mixed-methods study comprised questionnaires with 133 adult male AAS users (with 38% selecting increased libido as motivation for using), and 23 semi-structured interviews with a sub-sample. Thematic analysis identified four interlinked themes: increased libido as a motivation for starting/re-starting AAS; increased libido/sexual performance as a beneficial effect; mixed experiences with physicians regarding libido changes and hypogonadism and reduced sexual functioning and fertility after AAS cessation. Increased libido was identified as a benefit by 90% but motivations for use changed over time. Reasons for AAS use included mitigating the effects of aging particularly linked to the concept of virility. AAS as self-medication for low testosterone needs further investigation as does the idea of hegemonic masculinity as a reinforcing driver for AAS use. This study highlights the need to consider how AAS users’ views of medical support impact self-medication choices.

Potential risk for developing severe COVID-19 disease among anabolic steroid users / Flavio Cadegiani, Erica M. Lin, Andy Goren, Carlos G. Wambier. - (BMJ Case Reports 14 (2021) 2 (26 February))

• PMID: 33637513
• PMCID: PMC7919571
• DOI: 10.1136/bcr-2021-241572

Abstract

A severe case of COVID-19 was observed in an otherwise healthy 28-year-old man who had taken oxandrolone 40 mg/day as an anabolic steroid. The patient had been taking oxandrolone for enhanced bodybuilding 30 days prior to presenting to an outpatient clinic with COVID-19 symptoms. The patient reported that his symptoms have rapidly worsened over the course of 4 days prior to presenting at the clinic. As part of an experimental antiandrogen treatment for hyperandrogenic men suffering from COVID-19, he was administered a single 600 mg dose of the novel antiandrogen proxalutamide. Twenty-four hours after administration of this dose, marked improvement of symptoms and markers of disease severity were observed. To our knowledge, this is the first case that potentially links anabolic steroid use to COVID-19 disease severity.

Related case:

NADDP 2020 ADC vs Isabel Grech
January 4, 2021

On 4 January 2021 the National Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel decided on 4 January 2021 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the volleyball player Isabel Grech for her refusal to submit to sample collection.

In first instance the Panel established that the Athlete was duly warned by the Doping Control Officer of the consequences for her refusal. Further she failed to be aware of the anti-doping rules and that she could apply for a TUE regarding her prescribed medication she used.

Hereafter In January 2021 the Athlete appealed the Decision with the National Anti-Doping Appeal Panel. She requested to set aside the Appealed Decision and for a reduced sanction.

The Athlete admitted the violation and denied that she acted intentionally. She asserted that there were mittigating circumstances for the imposition of an reduced sanction.

In view of the Athlete's conduct the Appeal Panel holds that it is undisputed that the Athlete had refused to submit to sample collection and accordingly that she committed an anti-doping rule violation.

The Appeal Panel concludes that the Athlete was fully aware of the consequences of her refusal to submit to sample collection. The Appeal Panel also did not accept that an experienced Athlete, for 20 years involved in Volleybal, was unaware of the anti-doping rules and the necessity to apply for a TUE.

Therefore the Appeal Panel decides on 28 February 2021 to dismiss the Athlete's Appeal and to uphold the Appealed Decision for the imposition of a 4 year period of ineligibility, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 3 February 2020.

Profiling of 19-norandrosterone sulfate and glucuronide in human urine : implications in athlete's drug testing / Emmanuel Strahm, Norbert Baume, Patrice Mangin, Martial Saugy, Christiane Ayotte, Christophe Saudan. - (Steroids 74 (2009) 3 (March); p. 359-364)

• PMID: 19056413
• DOI: 10.1016/j.steroids.2008.11.005

Abstract

19-Norandrosterone (19-NA) as its glucuronide derivative is the target metabolite in anti-doping testing to reveal an abuse of nandrolone or nandrolone prohormone. To provide further evidence of a doping with these steroids, the sulfoconjugate form of 19-norandrosterone in human urine might be monitored as well. In the present study, the profiling of sulfate and glucuronide derivatives of 19-norandrosterone together with 19-noretiocholanolone (19-NE) were assessed in the spot urines of 8 male subjects, collected after administration of 19-nor-4-androstenedione (100mg). An LC/MS/MS assay was employed for the direct quantification of sulfoconjugates, whereas a standard GC/MS method was applied for the assessment of glucuroconjugates in urine specimens. Although the 19-NA glucuronide derivative was always the most prominent at the excretion peak, inter-individual variability of the excretion patterns was observed for both conjugate forms of 19-NA and 19-NE. The ratio between the glucuro- and sulfoconjugate derivatives of 19-NA and 19-NE could not discriminate the endogenous versus the exogenous origin of the parent compound. However, after ingestion of 100mg 19-nor-4-androstenedione, it was observed in the urine specimens that the sulfate conjugates of 19-NA was detectable over a longer period of time with respect to the other metabolites. These findings indicate that more interest shall be given to this type of conjugation to deter a potential doping with norsteroids.

Urinary marker of oral pregnenolone administration / Christophe Saudan, Aurélien Desmarchelier, Pierre-Edouard Sottas, Patrice Mangin, Martial Saugy. - (Steroids 70 (2005) 3 (March); p. 179-183)

• PMID: 15763596
• DOI: 10.1016/j.steroids.2004.12.007

Abstract

Pregnenolone (PREG) can potentially be abused by athletes to maintain an equilibration of the steroidal environment after sex steroids administrations. Five men volunteers orally ingested 50 mg PREG to determine optimal urinary markers for detection of this steroid. Our findings show that ingestion of PREG has no significant effects on the testosterone/epitestosterone (T/E) and testosterone/luteinizing hormone (T/LH) ratios, whereas variable changes on the carbon isotopic values of three T metabolites: androsterone, etiocholanolone, 5beta-androstane-3alpha,17beta-diol (5beta-androstanediol) together with 16(5alpha)-androsten-3alpha-ol (androstenol) and 5beta-pregnane-3alpha,20alpha-diol (pregnanediol) have been observed. The difference between the carbon isotopic values (delta13C-values) of androstenol and pregnanediol is potentially the most reliable marker of exogenous PREG administration in males. For all subjects, the differences differ by 3.0 per thousand or more over a period of about 10 h and for both of them the detection window for positivity is extended over 40 h.

Annexes to the RusAF Reinstatement Plan / RusAF Reinstatement Commission. - Moscow : World Athletics, 2021

Content

• Annex A. Rusaf Operational Roadmap
• Annex B. Russian Law For Physical Education And Sport
• Annex C. Charter
• Annex D. Employment Contract With The Coach
• Annex E. Employment Contract With An Athlete
• Annex F. The Assessment Of The Structure Of Anti-Doping Rules Violation And The Evaluation Of Anti-Doping Measures Efficiency In Russian Athletics During 2000-2020
• Annex G. Regulation For The Anti-Doping And Athletics Integrity Department
• Annex H. Rusaf Body And Structure
• Annex I. Sports Management In Russia
• Annex J. Rusaf Budget Structure For 2021

RusAF Reinstatement Plan - Towards a Clean Future for Russian Athletics : version of February 2021 sumbitted for the approval of World Athletics / RusAF Reinstatement Commission. - Moscow : World Athletics, 2021

Contents

1. Executive Summary
2. Pillars Of Reform, Kpis And Timescales
3. Rusaf Strategic Steps, Priorities And Timeline
4. Introduction
5. Background
6. Vision Of A Clean Future Of Russian Athletics
7. Brief Review Of The Origins Of The Crisis
8. The Current State Of Russian Athletics
9. The Immediate Actions To Be Undertaken - Governance
10. The Actions To Be Undertaken – Anti-Doping
11. Conclusions

Following detailed work by World Athletics’ Russia Taskforce, its independent experts, and RusAF, a final plan for the reinstatement of RusAF to membership of World Athletics was recommended to the World Athletics Council last week.

In an email to the World Athletics Council, Taskforce Chairman Rune Andersen wrote: “The Taskforce has now reviewed and provided detailed feedback on three different drafts of the Reinstatement Plan. The three international experts appointed by World Athletics have worked closely with RusAF on the development of the Reinstatement Plan and advised the Taskforce that they believe the Plan is fit for the purpose of embedding in Russian athletics the deep-rooted change in culture that Council has been demanding for the past five years. In addition, although RusAF President Peter Ivanov has been required to step down for two years because of his appointment as a senior official of the Russian Government (to respect the CAS sanctions imposed on Russian Government officials in the WADA/RUSADA compliance case), the international experts also consider that the senior management that Mr Ivanov has put in place will be able to move the Plan forward in his absence, under the temporary leadership of RusAF Vice-President Irina Privalova as Acting President.

“For its part, the Taskforce stands ready to monitor the milestones and KPIs in the Reinstatement Plan carefully, so that it is able to report to future Council meetings whether RusAF is keeping up with the enormous work that will be required to implement the Reinstatement Plan successfully.

“On this basis, the Taskforce recommends that Council resolves (1) to approve the Reinstatement Plan; and (2) to publish it on the World Athletics website.”

World Athletics’ Council unanimously agreed the Taskforce recommendations.

Russia Taskforce Report to Council Meeting of 30 July 2020 / Rune Andersen. - Monaco : World Athletics, 2020

The World Athletics Council decided on 30 July 2020 to expel the Russian Federation (RusAF) from membership of World Athletics if it does not make the outstanding payments of a $US5 million fine and $US1.31 million in costs before 15 August.

The Council, meeting by teleconference due to the ongoing global Covid-19 pandemic, agreed to follow the recommendations of the Taskforce, delivered by chairperson Rune Andersen in his Russia Taskforce Report.

Addressing the Council, Andersen expressed his disappointment that the Taskforce had seen “very little in terms of changing the culture of Russian athletics” in the past five years.

He said the Taskforce had spent “an enormous amount of time and effort trying to help RusAF reform itself and Russian athletics, for the benefit of all clean Russian athletes” but the response from RusAF had been inadequate.

In light of a letter sent to World Athletics by the Russian Minister of Sport Oleg Matytsin today, which promises payment of the overdue amounts by August 15, the Taskforce’s recommendations were:

Expulsion Decision

1. To recommend to Congress that it resolves to expel RusAf from membership of World Athletics, in accordance with Article 14.1 of the Constitution, on the basis that the matters that led Congress to suspend RusAF from membership pursuant to Article 13.7 have not been satisfactorily addressed.
2. To recommend that a Special Congress meeting be convened as soon as possible to allow Congress to consider and vote on the proposal to expel RusAF. In the circumstances of the ongoing and worsening pandemic, that Special Congress meeting should if possible be held virtually, to avoid delay.
3. That pending Congress’s decision, the “Neutral Athlete” mechanism will not be made available to Russian athletes.

This decision is suspended, but will come into effect immediately and automatically if any of the following conditions are not met:

1. Payment in full of the two outstanding RusAF invoices to be received on or before close of business in Monaco on 15 August 2020.
2. The RusAF Reinstatement Commission to provide the draft plan referenced in the third paragraph of Council’s decision of 12 March 2020 – of suitable scope and depth, with an implementation plan and progress indicators – to the Taskforce on or before 31 August 2020.
3. Any changes required by the Taskforce to the draft plan to be incorporated to the Taskforce’s satisfaction on or before 30 September 2020.
4. The Plan to be brought into effect and satisfactory progress achieved against the plan (as determined by the Taskforce, based on the input of the international experts appointed by World Athletics), as reported by the Taskforce to Council at each of its subsequent meetings.

In relation to Authorised Neutral Athletes (ANAs):

1. Athletes may apply for ANA status for 2020 competitions in accordance with the process specified by the Doping Review Board.
2. No ANA status will be granted to any athlete for 2020 competitions unless and until conditions (1) to (3)  above are met.
3. If conditions (1) to (3) are met, then in accordance with Council’s March decision, (1) no more than ten athletes (in total, not perevent) will be granted ANA status for World Athletics Series events. (The ony such event scheduled for 2020 is the World Athletics Half Marathon Championships in Gdynia); (2) there is no cap on ANAs for other international competitions in 2020.
4. Council’s March 2020 decision to allow up to 10 Authorised Neutral Athletics for World Athletics Series events and the Tokyo Olympics will be reviewed no earlier than December 2020, based on an assessment of the progress made by RusAF against the reinstatement plan.

Background Note: The Council decided in March to sanction RusAF’s admitted breaches of the Anti-Doping Rules during the Lysenko investigation with a $US10 million fine, with $5 million to be paid by 1 July 2020 and the other $5 million suspended. The Council also required RusAF to pay related costs by 1 July 2020.