Related cases:

• World Athletics 2020 WA vs Maria Guadalupe González Romero
  July, 30, 2021
• CAS 2019_A_6319 Maria Guadalupe Gonzalez Romero vs IAAF
  July 2, 2020
• IAAF 2018 IAAF vs María Guadalupe González Romero
  May 9, 2019
  
  

On 9 May 2019 the IAAF (now: World Athletics) Disciplinary Tribunal decided to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Mexican Athlete María Guadalupe González Romero after her A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Trenbolone.

In First Instance the Sole Arbitrator deemed that the explanation together with the evidence produced by the Athlete were not convincing, contradicting and unreliable. Consequently her explanation was rejected for lack of credibility since she failed to establish that her violation was not intentional.

In June 2020 the Athlete appealed with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). However on 2 July 2020 the CAS Panel confirmed the Appealed IAAF Decision of 9 May 2019. During the CAS hearing the Athlete acknowledged that she had provided false statements and evidence.

Thereupon in July 2020 the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU), on behalf of World Athletics, reported a new anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete for Tampering because of the false statements, fabricated evidence and false documents she had provided to the AIU.

Consequently the World Athletics Disciplinary Tribunal decided on 30 July 2020 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete. This new sanction shall run consecutively to the period of ineligibility already imposed on the Athlete until 15 November 2022, thus starting on 16 November 2022 until 15 November 2026.

Hereafter in September the Athlete appealed the Tampering Decision with CAS. She requested the Panel to set aside the Appealed Tampering Decision and to annul or reduce the imposed sanction.

Regarding the preliminary and procedural issues raised by the Athlete the Panel is confident that the present proceedings has been conducted with full respect for the principles of legality and the right to be heard. In particular, the Athlete's multiple procedural requests and objections have all been fully considered.

Furthermore the Panel assessed and addressed the following issues:

• Is the Evidence of Tampering in the Presence/Use Proceedings irrebuttable?;
• Did the alleged Tampering take place during a Doping Control process?;
• What are the implications of the other evidence relating to the Tampering Charge?;
• Ne bis in idem / res judicata: are the Tampering Proceedings unnecessary and abusive?;
• Other Arguments of the Appellant; and
• Sanctions.

Accordingly the Panel concludes:

• There was no breach of natural justice affecting the CAS Presence/Use Award dated 2 July 2020 and therefore pursuant to Article 3.2.5 of the 2019 ADR the factual findings of lying and falsification of evidence in this decision constitute irrebuttable evidence against the Athlete of these facts;
• The falsification of evidence referred to in the Notice of Charge occurred within the Doping Control process;
• The Athlete is guilty of conduct which subverts the Doping Control process within the meaning of Article 2.5 of the 2019 ADR through the presentation of false evidence in the Presence/Use proceedings with the intention of deceiving the IAAF Disciplinary Tribunal.
• The charge of an ADRV for Tampering has been established.
• The principles of ne bis in idem and res judicata have no application to the determination of the Tampering Charge or its sanction.

Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 29 December 2023 that:

1.) The appeal of Maria Guadalupe Gonzalez Romero is dismissed.

2.) The decision rendered by the World Athletics' Disciplinary Tribunal on 30 July 2021 is confirmed.

3.) The award is pronounced without costs, except for the Court Office fee of CHF 1,000 (one thousand Swiss Francs) paid by the Maria Guadalupe Gonzalez Romero, which is retained by the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

4.) Maria Guadalupe Gonzalez Romero shall pay to World Athletics a contribution in the amount of CHF 6,000 (six thousand Swiss Francs) toward its legal fees and expenses incurred in connection with the present proceedings.

5.) All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.

In April 2023 the India National Anti-Doping Agency (INADA) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Sanjeet after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance GW1516.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of India (ADDPI).

The Panel establishes that the Athlete admitted the violation, yet failed to sign and submit the Acceptance of Consequences Form within the set deadline. Further the Panel considers that this is the Athlete's second anti-doping rule violation.

Therefore the ADDPI decides on 27 December 2023 to impose an 8 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 26 April 2023.

In March 2023 the International Tennis Federation (ITF) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Russian tennis player Vladislav Ivanov for his evasion, refusal or failure to submit to sample collection. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the ITF Disciplinary Tribunal.

Anti-Doping Personnel reported that on 14 September 2022, the Athlete did not attend immediately the Doping Control Station at the tournament in Morocco. Instead following notification he shouted at the Chaperone, threw the paperwork on the grount and went to his hotel.

After the Athlete had received a new nofication he first watched a match of friends and had discussions. Only two and a half hours after he had received notification from the Chaperone he attended the Doping Control Center and provided a sample.

The Athlete denied the charges and disputed the testimonies of the Chaperone, the Doping Control Officer and the Tournament Official. He believed that he had permission to go to his hotel room.

He asserted that at the tournament he indeed had provided a sample. He acknowledged that he had received anti-doping education and had been tested.

Because the Athlete previously had received anti-doping education and had been tested two weeks before the incident the Tribunal Panel considers that he should have understand his obligations as an Athlete.

The Panel establishes that the Athlete provided different and confusing explanations to justify his conduct. Further the Panel determines that he knew or should have known that he was not allowed to delay the provision of the Sample and nothing should have made him legitimately think that he was authorised not to give it at that moment.

The Panel deems that the Athlete understood the situation and took a conscious decision not to comply with the request. The Panell believes that the he simply decided not to provide the sample at that moment and went directly to the hotel without permission to do so.

The Panel concludes that the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation by refusing to provide a sample when asked to do so. He also failed to demonstrate that this violation was justified because of exceptional circumstances.

Therefore the Independent Tribunal decides on 21 December 2023 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the decision.

In June 2023 the India National Anti-Doping Agency (INADA) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the judoka Rahul Sevta after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances Oxandrolone and Stanozolol.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of India (ADDPI).

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and requested for a reduced sanction. He could not explain how the substance had entered his system.

He alleged that the source of the prohibited substances were the supplements or food provided by the coaches at the training camp. He further claimed that the meat he consumed in the camp might have been spiked.

The Panel finds that the presence of the prohibited substances had been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that he had committed an anti-doping rule violation.

The Panel determines that in the camp 9 athletes had been,  tested, of which 3 athletes tested positive. The Athlete himself tested positive for Oxandrolone and Stanozolol, yet the other two athletes for completely other prohibited substances.

The Panel concludes that the Athlete failed to demonstrate with evidence that the supplements and food in the camp were the source of the prohibited substances. The Panel did not accept his explanations and deems that he had used these substances intentionally.

Therefore the ADDPI decides on 21 December 2023 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 20 June 2023.

In December 2023 the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU), on behalf of World Athletics, reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Kenyan Athlete Maurine Chepkemoi after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Erythropoietin (EPO).

Following notification the Athlete timely admitted the violation, waived her right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by the AIU.

Because she had signed and submitted the Admission of Anti-Doping Rule Violations and Acceptance of Consequences Form she received a 1 year reduction from the AIU.

Therefore the AIU decides on 21 December 2023 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 4 December 2023.

In December 2021 the Pan American Sports Organization (PASO) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Argentine cyclist Juan Manuel Godoy after he tested positive for the prohibited substance Stanozolol.

Consequently the PASO Disciplinary Commission (PASO DC) decided on 23 February 2022 that the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation and to disqualify his results obtained at the 2021 Junior Pan American Games.

Hereafter the case was referred to the UCI to consider further action on sanction and consequences. Following notification the UCI upheld the Athlete's provisional suspension.

In January 2023 the UCI considered that the Athlete refused the Acceptance of Consequences and the case was referred to the UCI Anti-Doping Tribunal. Without a hearing the Sole Arbitrator rendered a decision based on the written submissions of the Parties.

The Athlete admitted the violation and denied the intentional use of the substance. He requested for a reduced sanction and to lift the provisional suspension.

He argued that his case must be dismissed because there had been irregularities in the proceedings before the PASO DC. Moreover on the basis of ne bis in idem he claimed that the PASO DC had already sanctioned him.

Further the Athlete alleged that the source of the positive test were supplements contaminated by members of the Argentinian Team. Yet, analysis of his supplements revealed no banned substances because the relevant technology was unavailable at the laboratory that conducted the analysis.

Preliminary the Soul Arbitrator determines that there was no violation of the principle of ne bis in idem because under the applicable rules it was valid to refer the case to the UCI for completion of Results Management.

The Sole Arbitrator confirmes the decision of the PASO DC that the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation for the presence of a prohibited substance in his sample.

In view of the evidence the Arbitrator concludes that the Athlete failed to establish that the violation was not intentional. Furthermore there are also no grounds for a reduced sanction.

The Arbitrator deems that without any corroborating evidence the Athlete did not demonstrate that contaminated supplements were the source of the positive test. Neither did he demonstrate how the prohibited substance had entered his system.

Therefore the UCI Anti-Doping Tribunal decides on 20 December 2023 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e on 17 December 2021.

The UCI costs for the results management shall be borne by the Athlete.

In November 2023 Drug Free Sport New Zealand (DFSNZ) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the rugby player Evaan Reihana after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cocaine.

Following notification the Athlete admitted the violation, denied the intentional use of the substance and accepted the sanction proposed by DFSNZ. DFSNZ accepted that the violation was not intentional and that the use of Cocaine occurred out-of-competition.

The Athlete acknowledged that he had used the substance out-of-competition the day before the competition to cope with a family crisis.

The Tribunal assessed the joint memorandum of counsel and agrees that the Athlete's violation was not intentional and occurred out-of-competition in a context unrelated to sport performance. The Tribunal further determines that there is no need to order a Provisional Suspension and deems that there are no grounds to redact the name of the recreational Athlete from this decision.

Therefore the Tribunal decides on 20 December 2023 to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the decision.

In November 2023 the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU), on behalf of World Athletics, reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Kenyan Athlete Thomas Kibet Kutere after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone).

Following notification the Athlete timely admitted the violation, waived his right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by the AIU. He stated that he had used painkillers for his injury and that he was unaware that they contained a prohibited substance.

The AIU deems that the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional. Because he had signed and submitted the Admission of Anti-Doping Rule Violations and Acceptance of Consequences Form he received a 1 year reduction from the AIU.

Therefore the AIU decides on 19 December 2023 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 3 November 2023.

On 16 Januari 2023 the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of India (ADDPI) decided to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete Radha after she tested positive for the prohibited substance Erythropoietin (EPO).

Hereafter the Athlete appealed the ADDPI decision with the Anti-Doping Appeal Panel of India (ADAPI). The Athlete requested the Appeal Panel to set aside the Appealed Decision and to impose a reduced sanction.

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and claimed that she acted with No Significant Fault or Negligence. She explained with medical records that she had used prescribe medications as treatment for her diagnosed condition.

Further the Athlete asserted that she was hampered in her defence due problems with her original e-mail account. As a result she was unaware of the hearing, nor notified about the decision rendered by the ADDPI.

The India National Anti-Doping Agency (INADA) contended that a prohibited substance had been established in the Athlete's sample and that the Athlete had no valid TUE. Furthermore her medical treatment could not explain the presence of EPO in her sample.

Also INADA contended that the Athlete had admitted the violation and had acted negligently with her medication. Moreover there was sufficient e-mail evidence that showed that the Athlete was aware of the proceedings.

The Appeal Panel assessed the evidence in this case and determines that:

• The presence of a prohibited substance had been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly she had committed an anti-doping rule violation.
• The Athlete's medical reports and prescribed medication could not explain the use en presence of EPO.
• The Athlete failed to demonstrate the source of EPO.
• E-mail correspondence showed that the Athlete was aware of the proceedings and that she didn't care.

Therefore the ADAPI Panel decides on 18 December 2023 to uphold the Appealed Decision and the imposed 4 year period of ineligibility.

In August 2023 the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (ADAK) reported and anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Betty Chelangat after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Methasterone.

Following notification the Athlete timely admitted the violation, waived her right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by ADAK.

ADAK deems that the Athlete's violation was intentional and determines that she shall receive a 1 year reduction for her timely admission of the anti-doping rule violation.

Therefore ADAK decides on 14 December 2023 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 12 September 2023.