CAS 2008/A/1664 International Rugby Board (IRB) v. Luke Troy & Australian Rugby Union (ARU)

Related cases:

• CAS 2008_A_1652 WADA vs Luke Troy & ARU - Preliminary Award
  March 18, 2009
• CAS 2008_A_1664 IRB vs Luke Troy & ARU - Partial Award
  August 6, 2009
  
  

• Rugby
• Doping (attempt use of prohibited substance)
• Determination of the applicable sanction

An athlete having committed an anti-doping rule violation by engaging in conduct pursuant to which he sought to acquire “Prohibited Substances” over the internet, should be sanctioned with a two years suspension. The period during which time the athlete was provisionally suspended shall be deducted from the end date of the sanction imposed.

By a Partial Arbitral Award delivered by the Panel on 2 June 2009 the appeal of the International Rugby Board (IRB) against the decision of the ARU judicial committee of 12 March 2008 was in part allowed and the decision of the ARU judicial committee was set aside.

By lts Award the Panel ruled that Mr Troy had committed an anti-doping rule violation pursuant to By-Law 5.2.2 of the ARU Anti-Doping By-Laws by engaging in conduct pursuant to which he sought to acquire "Prohibited Substances" over the internet.

It was further ruled by that Award that the question of sanction be reserved and directions were given as to the filing in the CAS Oceania Registry of written submissions by the parties as to sanction.

Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 6 August 2009 that:

1.) The period of ineligibility of Mr Luke Troy will be two years from 2 June 2009.

2.) The period of ineligibility of Mr Luke Troy referred to in order 1 above will be reduced by a period of 28 days and will terminate on 5 May 2011.

3.) (…).

NIDA (National Institute of Drug Abuse)

Throughout much of the last century, scientists studying drug abuse labored in the shadows of powerful myths and misconceptions about the nature of addiction. When science began to study addictive behavior in the 1930s, people addicted to drugs were thought to be morally flawed and lacking in willpower. Those views shaped society’s responses to drug abuse, treating it as a moral failing rather than a health problem, which led to an emphasis on punitive rather than preventative and therapeutic actions. Today, thanks to science, our views and our responses to drug abuse have changed dramatically. Groundbreaking discoveries about the brain have revolutionized our understanding of drug addiction, enabling us to respond effectively to the problem.
As a result of scientific research, we know that addiction is a disease that affects both brain and behavior. We have identified many of the biological and environmental factors and are beginning to search for the genetic variations that contribute to the development and progression of the disease. Scientists use this knowledge to develop effective prevention and treatment approaches that reduce the toll drug abuse takes on individuals, families, and communities. Despite these advances, many people today do not understand why individuals become addicted to drugs or how drugs change the brain to foster compulsive drug abuse. This booklet aims to fill that knowledge gap by providing scientific information about the disease of drug addiction, including the many harmful consequences of drug abuse and the basic approaches that have been developed to prevent and treat the disease. At the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), we believe that increased understanding of the basics of addiction will empower people to make informed choices in their own lives, adopt science-based policies and programs that reduce drug abuse and addiction in their communities, and support scientific research that improves the Nation’s well-being.

Nora D. Volkow, M.D.
Director National Institute on Drug Abuse

NIH Pub No. 10-5605 Revised August 2010

CAS 2006/A/1067 International Rugby Board (IRB) v. Jason Keyter

• Rugby
• Doping (benzoylecgonine)
• Burden and standard of proof
• Duty to establish the route of ingestion
• Significant negligence

1. The burden of proof is initially on the party asserting that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred. As to the standard of proof, the same party shall establish “to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing body” that a violation has occurred. This standard of proof is greater than “a mere balance of probability” but less than “proof beyond reasonable doubt”. Once the Sport Federation has discharged the above burdens, the athlete accused of the anti-doping rule violation is subject to “strict liability”. This means that the presence in the athlete’s body or bodily specimen of a prohibited substance, regardless of the athlete’s intent, knowledge, fault or negligence, is sufficient to establish an anti-doping rule violation and thus the athlete’s presumptive guilt. The athlete may rebut the presumption of guilt by proving absence of fault or negligence or, alternatively, absence of significant fault or negligence. The athlete is required to establish that the fault or negligence was not significant on the “balance of probability”.

2. The failure to establish how the prohibited substance entered the athlete’s bodily specimen means that exceptional circumstances have not been established and there can be no reduction in the sanction from the otherwise established two year suspension. The mere allegation that the athlete has no idea how a forbidden substance entered into his body, and relies as a possible explanation on the ingestion of cocaine through a “spiked drink” that was offered him by strangers in a night club is not sufficient to establish the route of ingestion.

3. An athlete is significantly negligent when he/she failed to exercise any caution (let alone the utmost caution), thereby failing both the “No Fault or Negligence” test and the “No Significant Fault or Negligence” test. The submission that getting drunk, and possibly not realizing and/or remembering what was going on, cannot be considered as an exceptional circumstance excusing an athlete from his/her fault or negligence.

On 16 March 2006 the Review Panel of the Rugby Football Union (RFU) decided to uphold the sanction of 12 months imposed on the rugby player Jason Keyter after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Cocaine. 

Hereafter in April 2006 the International Rugby Board (IRB) appealed the RFU Decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). IRB requested the Panel to set aside the appealed decision and to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.

Following assessment of the case the Panel determines that:

• The Athlete alleged to have committed a doping violation bears the burden of persuading the judging body that the occurrence of a specified circumstance is more probable than its non-occurrence.
• The Athlete’s anti-doping rule violation is proven to its comfortable satisfaction, bearing in mind the seriousness of the allegation.
• The Athlete's failure to establish how the prohibited substance had entered his bodily specimen means that exceptional circumstances have not been established and there can be no reduction in the sanction from the otherwise established two year suspension.

Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 13 October 2006:

1.) The appeal filed by the International Rugby Board on 7 April 2006 is upheld and the Decision issued by the Review Panel of the RFU on 16 March 2006 is varied to impose a two year sanction.

2.) Mr Jason Keyter is declared ineligible for a period of two years, from 15 November 2005 to 14 November 2007.

(…).

CAS 2011/A/2675 Mita Overvliet v. International Weightlifting Federation (IWF)

• Weightlifting
• Doping (norandrosterone; furosemide)
• Scope and applicability of the WADA Code
• Interpretation of statutes and regulations of a federation
• Interpretation of an IF’s rule providing a four years ineligibility for a first offence contrary to the WADA Code
• Compatibility with Swiss law

1. The WADA Code is neither a law nor an international treaty. It is rather a contractual instrument binding its signatories in accordance with private international law. To become applicable, the WADA Code must be accepted and implemented according to the signatory’s authority and within its relevant spheres of responsibility. To become applicable, the WADA Code and its provisions need to be transformed into the regulations of a signatory.

2. According to Swiss law, statutes and regulations of associations have to be construed and interpreted in the same way as public laws. The Swiss Federal Tribunal and leading commentators tend to interpret the statutes and regulations of associations in an objective way, comparable to the interpretation of statutory law. Accordingly, CAS jurisprudence requires the interpretation of the statutes and rules of sport associations to be objective and always to start with the wording of the rule. It follows that the adjudicating body has to consider the meaning of the rule, looking at the language used, the appropriate grammar and the syntax. The intentions (objectively construed) of the association including any relevant historical background may be taken into consideration.

3. By way of interpretation of an International Federation’s (IF) Anti-Doping Program (ADP) it has to be examined whether the ADP provides a four or a two years’ ineligibility for a first doping violation. The wording of the relevant article of the ADP is specific, clear and unambiguous and provides for a four years’ ineligibility for a first violation. However, there is an inconsistency between the preface of the ADP, which forms an integral part of the ADP, and the relevant article since in the preface it is stated that the IF accepted the revised (2009) WADA Code providing a two years’ ineligibility. Interpreted from the perspective of a systematic interpretation, the article providing specifically a four years’ period should prevail over the preface of the IF’s ADP and its general reference to the WADA Code as it is a lex specialis.

4. The four years’ sanction of ineligibility for a first doping offence does not violate the personality rights of an athlete nor Swiss public policy.

On 2 December 2012 teh IWF Doping Hearing Panel decided to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Dutch weightlifter Mita Overvliet after her A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substances Furosemide and 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone).

Hereafter in December 2012 the Athlete appealed the IWF Decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The Athlete requested the Panel to set aside the Appealed Decision and to impose a reduced sanction.

The Sole Arbitrator assessed and addressed these issues raised by the Athlete:

• Scope and applicability of the WADA Code;
• WADA's compliance reports are not decisive;
• Has the 2 years' period of ineligibility become part of the IWF's own regulations?;
• No discretion to reduce the period of ineligibility;
• Article 10.2 IWF ADP does it violate Swiss Law.

Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 25 May 2012:

1.) The Appeal filed by Ms. Mita Overvliet on 23 December 2011 against the decision dated 2 December 2011 rendered by the IWF Doping Hearing Panel is dismissed.

2.) The decision rendered by the IWF Doping Hearing Panel on 2 December 2012 is confirmed. Ms. Mita Overvliet being ineligible to compete in weightlifting competitions for a period of four years starting from 23 May 2011.

(…)

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

Diane L. Elliot ; JeeWon Cheong ; Esther L. Moe; Linn Goldberg
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2007;161:572-577

Objective: To determine the characteristics of female
US high school students reporting anabolic steroid use.

Design: Cross-sectional assessment using the 2003 Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention national schoolbased
Youth Risk Behavior Survey database.
Setting: Nationally representative sample of US high
schools.
Participants: Female students in grades 9 through 12
(n=7544).
Main Outcome Measures: Participants’ self-reported
anabolic steroid use was compared with other healthrelated
behaviors and with sports participation.
Results: Prior or ongoing anabolic steroid use was reported
by 5.3% of female high school students. Those adolescent
girls had a marked increase in other healthcompromising
behaviors, including past 30-day use of alcohol (odds ratio [OR], 8.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.49-14.20]), cigarettes (OR, 5.14; 95% CI, 3.14-8.42), marijuana (OR, 7.91; 95% CI, 5.20-12.04), cocaine (OR, 10.78; 95% CI, 6.18-18.81), and diet pills (OR,
4.86; 95% CI, 2.98-7.93). They were more likely to carry
a weapon (OR, 7.54; 95% CI, 4.83-11.76), have had sexual
intercourse before age 13 years (OR, 2.90; 95% CI, 1.58-
5.33), and have had feelings of sadness or hopelessness almost every day for at least 2 consecutive weeks (OR, 4.13; 95% CI, 2.57-7.22). They were less likely to play school-sponsored team sports (OR, 0.52; 95% CI 0.34-0.80). Steroid users participating in sports shared the same problem behaviors as steroid users not participating in team athletics.
Conclusion: Self-reported anabolic steroid use is not confined
to adolescent girls in competitive athletics and is an indicator of adolescent girls with a marked increase in a cluster of other health-harming behaviors.

A T Kicman
Br J Pharmacol. 2008 June; 154(3): 502–521.
Published online 2008 May 26. doi: 10.1038/bjp.2008.165

Abstract
Athletes and bodybuilders have recognized for several decades that the use of anabolic steroids can promote muscle growth and strength but it is only relatively recently that these agents are being revisited for clinical purposes. Anabolic steroids are being considered for the treatment of cachexia associated with chronic disease states, and to address loss of muscle mass in the elderly, but nevertheless their efficacy still needs to be demonstrated in terms of improved physical function and quality of life. In sport, these agents are performance enhancers, this being particularly apparent in women, although there is a high risk of virilization despite the favourable myotrophic–androgenic dissociation that many xenobiotic steroids confer. Modulation of androgen receptor expression appears to be key to partial dissociation, with consideration of both intracellular steroid metabolism and the topology of the bound androgen receptor interacting with co-activators. An anticatabolic effect, by interfering with glucocorticoid receptor expression, remains an attractive hypothesis. Behavioural changes by non-genomic and genomic pathways probably help motivate training. Anabolic steroids continue to be the most common adverse finding in sport and, although apparently rare, designer steroids have been synthesized in an attempt to circumvent the dope test. Doping with anabolic steroids can result in damage to health, as recorded meticulously in the former German Democratic Republic. Even so, it is important not to exaggerate the medical risks associated with their administration for sporting or bodybuilding purposes but to emphasize to users that an attitude of personal invulnerability to their adverse effects is certainly misguided.

Issues for DSM-V: Clarifying the Diagnostic Criteria for Anabolic-Androgenic Steroid Dependence / Gen Kanayama, Kirk, J. Brower, Ruth I. Wood, James I. Hudson, Harrison G. Pope, Jr.. - (American Journal of Psychiatry 166 (2009) 6 (June); 642-645)

• PMID: 19487399
• PMCID: PMC2696068
• DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2009.08111699

llicit anabolic-androgenic steroid (AAS) use represents a growing worldwide publichealth problem. Some AAS users consume only a few courses of these drugs in a lifetime, but others progress to a maladaptive pattern of almost continuous use, despite adverse medical, psychological, and social effects. In the last 20 years, accumulating animal and human studies have documented and characterized this syndrome of AAS dependence.

Sean Esteban McCabe, Kirk J. Brower, Brady T. West, Toben F. Nelson, and Henry Wechslerd. Drug Alcohol Depend. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2008 May 13.Published in final edited form as: Drug Alcohol Depend. 2007 October 8; 90(2-3): 243–251.

Abstract
This study assessed the prevalence, trends, and student- and college-level characteristics associated with the non-medical use of anabolic steroids (NMAS) among U.S. college students. Data were collected through self-administered mail surveys, from 15,282, 14,428, 13,953, and 10,904 randomly selected college students at the same 119 nationally representative colleges in 1993, 1997, 1999 and 2001, respectively. The prevalence of lifetime, past-year and past-month NMAS was 1% or less and generally did not change significantly between 1993 and 2001, with one exception: past-year NMAS increased significantly among men from 1993 (0.36%) to 2001 (0.90%). Multiple logistic regression analyses revealed that lifetime and past-year NMAS were associated with student-level characteristics such as being male and participation in intercollegiate athletics. Lifetime and past-year NMAS were also positively associated with several risky behaviors, including cigarette smoking, illicit drug use, drinking and driving, and DSM-IV alcohol use disorders. Nearly 7 out of every 10 lifetime non-medical users of anabolic steroids met past-year criteria for a DSM-IV alcohol use disorder. Although the overall prevalence of NMAS remained low between 1993 and 2001, findings suggest that continued monitoring is necessary because male student-athletes are at heightened risk for NMAS and this behavior is associated with a wide range of risky health behaviors. The characteristics associated with NMAS have important implications for future practice and research.

Huidplooimetingen - minicollege Eigen Kracht (Dutch title)

Measuring bodyfat percentage can be a tricky thing to do correctly. Sportnutritionist Floris Wardenaar shows how to procede if you want to measure somebody's bodyfat percentage. At several points of the body the skinfolds are measured with a skinfold caliper and added to a sum that is compared to a skinfold table. To measure correctly you need a lot of experience. It is advised that the same person is taking the measurements in time to get a correct estimate.

This video is part of the True Strength (Eigen Kracht) campaign of the Dopingautoriteit. A campaign that warns gym users and bodybuilders for the health risks of doping use and offers healthy and effective alternatives (training, recovery, nutrition, nutritional supplements, mental techniques).

Nutrient Timing - minicollege Eigen Kracht (Dutch title)

Nutrient Timing is a concept in sportsnutrition that has gained considerable popularity with fitness enthousiasts and athletes alike. Sportnutritionist Floris Wardenaar discusses NT and it's different components (Energy Phase, Anabolic Phase and Growth Phase).

This video is part of the True Strength (Eigen Kracht) campaign of the Dopingautoriteit. A campaign that warns gym users and bodybuilders for the health risks of doping use and offers healthy and effective alternatives (training, recovery, nutrition, nutritional supplements, mental techniques).