The Royal Dutch Swimming Federation (Koninklijke Nederlandse Zwembond, KNZB) has reported an anti doping rule violation against this person after he tested positive for a prohibited cannabinoide substance.
Person stated that he had used the substance three days prior to the test and had no intention to enhance his performance.
The Disciplinary Committee concludes the person violated the anti doping rules and declared the person ineligibility for competition for 5 months. Fees and expenses for this committee shall be borne by person.

The Royal Dutch Motorcyclists Association (Koninklijke Nederlandse Motorrijders Vereniging, KNMV) has reported an anti doping rule violation against this person after he tested positive for the prohibited substance 11-nor-∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9carboxylic acid (a metabolite of cannabis). KNMV notified the person of the doping violation and ordered a provisional suspension. Person filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the Committee.

Person stated he had a depression and used cannabis a few weeks before the test. Person didn’t know cannabis is a prohibited substance for competitions and had no intention to enhance his performance.
The Disciplinary Committee concludes that there are mitigating circumstances and person already had accepted a provisional suspension. Therefore the Committee decides only to reprimand the person. Fees and expenses for this committee shall be borne by person.

In March 2006 the Royal Netherlands Strength Sport Fitness Federation (KNKF) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Person after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance cocaine. After notification the Person filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the ISR KNKF Disciplinary Committee.

The Person argued that there were departures of the ISTI as the Doping Control Officer didn't identify himself and there was no supervision at the Doping Control. Also the Person claimed that an ammonia tank of another trainer he had used could have contained the prohibtied substance.

The Disciplinary Committee finds that the DCO has indentified himself and the Person signed the papers confirming that the sample collection procedure was performed correctly.
The Person's use of a ammonia tank conflicts with the Rules as the tank could have contained prohibited substances and the Person is responsible that no prohibited substances entered his system.

The ISR KNKF Disciplinary Committee finds that the anti-doping violation has been established and decides on 26 June 2016 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Person.

Fees and expenses for this committee shall be borne by the Person.

The Royal Dutch Cycling Federation (Koninklijke Nederlandsche Wieler Unie, KNWU) has reported an anti doping rule violation against this person. Person failed to comply when person was selected by the anti-doping authorities to supply an urine sample at a competition in Belgium.
Person filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the Committee.

Person did provide the urine sample, which tested negative, but previously after notification he failed to stay under supervision of the DCO a period of time. After the finish person wasn’t quite fit and there were frictions between the DCO and person. The Person asserted that the DCO acted unprofessional and inconsiderate to person.
The Disciplinary Committee concludes that the lost of contact was only for a short period and both the DCO and person are responsible for this situation. Person is therefore acquitted of violation the Anti-Doping Rules.
Fees and expenses for this committee shall be borne by KNWU.

The Royal Dutch Billiards Federation (Koninklijke Nederlandse Biljart Bond, KNBB) has reported a violation of the Doping rules of the ISR. The results of a doping test concluded the prohibited substances methylecgonine, benzoylecgonine (metabolite of cocaine) and carboxy THC (metabolite of tetrahydrocannabinol) which are prohibited substances on the Anti-Doping Code (ADC) of the ISR, a violation of section 3.
The report filed on June 15, 2006, at the disciplinary committee, the analysis of the sample is dated June 2, 2006.
The award will be a period of ineligibility of 2 years commencing on the day of the verdict. A fee is settled.

Considerations:
The defendant is subjected to the independent ruling of the ISR.
The report of the violation is valid.
Letters send to the defendant are considered to be received, although the confirmation wasn't received due to the English maildelivery system.
Regarding the violation:
- defendant is a member of the KNBB
- the doping test took place
- the doping test was in accordance with the regulations
- the defendant agreed with the procedure
- the samples were handled correctly
- the found substances are prohibited by the ADC of the KNBB
- the defendant didn't ask for a test of the B-sample, by this the resulst of the A-sample were positive and declared legally
- there is no dispensation for the found forbidden substances
- a violation of the Anti-Doping Code section 3, paragraph 1 is proven
- Towards the substance metabolite of tetrahydrocarbinol a lower penalty is possible according section 37 of the ADC but Section 4, paragraph 2 of the ADC (if the penalty is according to the substance mentioned in section 38 of the ADC) allows the maximum of the sanction.
- a appeal can be made within 14 days after receiving this award

The Dutch Squash Federation (Squash Bond Nederland, SBN) has reported an anti doping rule violation against this person after he tested positive for the prohibited substance cannabis.
The Person was selected by the anti-doping authorities to provide a urine sample at a competition in Belgium.
The Disciplinary Committee decides to reprimand the person and to disqualify the competition result.

Royal Netherlands Power Sport and Fitness Federation (Koninklijke Nederlandse Krachtsport en Fitnessfederatie, KNKF) has reported an anti doping rule violation against this person after he tested positive for the prohibited substance 2α-methyl-5α-androstan-3α-ol-17-one (a metabolite of drostanolone).
KNKF notified the person of the doping violation and ordered a provisional suspension.
After notification person didn’t reply nor filed a statement in his defence. In absence of person the Disciplinary Committee considers the violation of the Anti-Doping Rules proven. Without mitigating circumstances it decides an ineligibility of two years.
Fees and expenses for this committee shall be borne by person.

The Royal Netherlands Power Sport and Fitness Federation (Koninklijke Nederlandse Krachtsport en Fitnessfederatie, KNKF) has reported an anti doping rule violation against this person after he tested positive for the prohibited substances: 17β-hydroxymethyl-17a-methyl-18-norandrost-1,4,13-trien-3-one (a metabolite of metandienone); and methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine).
Person filed a statement in his defence and contested the reliability of the laboratory result for the substance 17β-hydroxymethyl-17a-methyl-18-norandrost-1,4,13-trien-3-one (metandienone). Person claimed the sample was contaminated in the laboratory by another test sample. Person stated that he wasn’t well informed, as beginning weightlifter, of the presence of the substance methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine) caused by the supplements he used.
The Committee concluded the test results of the laboratory reliable in accordance with the ILS.
The Disciplinary Committee considers the violation of the Anti-Doping Rules proven. Without mitigating circumstances it decides an ineligibility of two years. Fees and expenses for this committee shall be borne by person.

The Royal Netherlands Yachting Union (Koninklijk Nederlands Watersport Verbond, KNWV) reported a violation of the Doping rules of the ISR for the refusal to attend a doping control after he was requested by a DCO.

written statement defendant:
In the period of May 2005 the defendant tried to get approved with a status and support by the KNWV in which he failed due to bad results. Another crewmember was approved. Defended assumed it was a closed case.
Defendant never received a copy of the Anti-Doping Code or was aware of it.
Defendant received a request to attend a doping test, due to his work he couldn't attend. He informed the DCO that he was making money and didn't receive a contribution of the KNWV and he stopped sailing, all this is a confusion.
The conversation was getting unpleasant and the defendant said he would be in contact with the KNWV.
By e-mail he explained the situation to the KNWV and explained if there were any consequences he would attend the doping test.
The KNWV told they would inform him about the consequences.
In April 2006 a DCO announced a doping test and the defendant went along with it, the results were never mentioned to him.

written statement KNWV
None

Oral reaction KNWV
The Anti-Doping Code is published on their website.
By an annual meeting in February the members are informed about the Anti-Doping Code.
Members with a C-status don't receive a hardcopy of the Anti-Doping Code.
The team mentioned received a contribution in 2005.
It is likely that the defendant didn't attend the annual meeting in February.
The defendant never confirmed that he signed off from the team.
In a letter on April 4, 2006, the case was mentioned to the board of the KNWV, but there were no member of the disciplinary committee.

Facts
The defendant was in 2005 a member of the KNWV and practicing the sport.
He was a crewmember in 2005 in the Tornado Class.
A declaration was filed for costs related to matches.
In a letter dated June 8, 2005, the Anti-Doping Code was mentioned.
In September 2005 the KNWV agreed to put defendant out of the team.
In November 2005 the defendant was put on a list for out of competition doping control
The status of the defendant on that list was "selected member".
Defendant refused a doping test, but complied for another test.
KNWV sends the papers related to the refusal to the Disciplinary Committee of the KNWV and several oral hearing are arranged.
Defendant fails to attend the oral hearings.
The cases is now transferred to the Disciplinary Committee.
The defendant will not attend a oral hearing.

The applicable rules are the Anti-Doping Code for the KNWV of 2004.
Concerning section 5.2 refusal to cooperate with a doping test, section 20 information, section 22.2 selection of a listed target group for doping control, section 22.3 selection of doping control for athletes out of the listed target group, section 33 appealing for a violation of the Anti-Doping Code, section 39 no (significant) fault or negligence.

Considerations
The Anti-Doping Code applies for all members of associations joining the KNWV.
The KNWV has not informed defendant the full application of section 20 of the Code.
The KNWV agreed that defendant was ruled out as a crewmember.
The defendant should not have been on the designated list of November 2005 for doping tests for out of competition.
The defendant should not have been on the designated list for doping test in November 2005.

Conclusions
It is obvious that the defendant didn't consider to be selected for a out of competition doping test. The Anti-Doping Code has no clause for athletes who can't be blamed for refusing to cooperate.
The defendant will be free of charge.

Decision
The defendant is free of charge for violating the Anti-Doping Code.

The Royal Dutch Billiards Association (KNBB) has reported a violation of the Doping rules of the ISR. Defendant failed to attend a doping test which is a doping rule violation section 5 paragraph 2 of the Anti-Doping Rules of the ISR (Instituut Sportrechtspraak).
The Disciplinary Committee discharges the defendant.

Considerations:
The Claimant reported the defendant.
Defendant submitted a written defence dated January 25, 2006.
The Chairman of the Disciplinary Committee doesn't impose a temporary penalty.
The Oral Hearing will take place on April 13, 2006.

Motivation
Defendant was a member of the KNBB. The KNBB recognizes in section 7 paragraph 1 the impedance of the judgment of the ISR for members of the KNBB.
The report handed in by the KNBB is valid.
It is not clear that the representative of the KNBB made clear the consequences for not attending the doping test.
The defendant claims he felt ill after his match, waited a short while and went home after mentioning this to the tournament leader.
There standard form to sign wasn't filled out. And the tournament leader didn't point out the location of the doping test.
The Disciplinary Committee can't determine if the procedure for designation the defendant for a doping test was correct.
The Disciplinary Committee decision is that the defendant is not the designated sportsman as in the Anti-Doping Code section 1 paragraph 4. The violation of section 5 paragraph 2 of the Anti-Doping Rules of the ISR hasn't been proven.
Both parties can appeal.