• SAIDS 2019_18 SAIDS vs Mahlatse Chiliboy Ralepelle
  June 25, 2020
• SARU 2011 SARU vs Mahlatse Chiliboy Ralepelle & Bjorn Basson
  January 27, 2011
• World Rugby 2014 WR vs Mahlatse Chiliboy Ralepelle
  June 16, 2015
  
  

on 25 June 2020 the SAIDS Disciplinary Panel decided to impose an 8 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete for his second anti-doping rule violation after he tested positive for the prohibited subsance Zeranol. Hereafter the Athlete appealed the Decision with the SAIDS Appeal Committee.

The Athlete argued that the Appealed Decision and findings of the Panel was erroneous and disproportional. He asserted that during the Doping Control departures occurred of the relevant Standards and Regulations whereas the report of the Doping Control Officer (DCO) was untrue.

SAIDS contended that the presence of a prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete's A and B samples and accordingly the he had committed a second anti-doping rule violation. The Athlete failed to demonstrate with any evidence that the alleged departures would or could have caused the positive test result. Also he failed to prove that the violation was not intentional, nor the source of the prohibited substance.

Considering the evidence in this case the Appeal Committee finds that the Athlete failed to prove on a balance of probability that there was a departure of the ISTI. Whilst there may have been a departure from the ISTI, such a departure could not have caused the positive test results.

Further the Athlete failed to demonstrate on a balance of probability that there was a partial sample. The alleged omission by the DCO on the chain of custody can't be viewed as a breach, neither as a departure that would invalidate the entire doping control process.

Finally the Appeal Committee concludes that the Athlete failed to establish the origin of the prohibited substance nor that the violation was intentional. Accordingly the Appeal Committee deems that the Athlete's violation was intentional and that he had committed a second anti-doping rule violation.

Therefore on 9 November 2020 the SAIDS Appeal Committee decides to dismiss the Athlete's appeal and to uphold the Appealed Decision and the imposed sanction of 8 years.

Related cases:

• SARU 2011 SARU vs Mahlatse Chiliboy Ralepelle & Bjorn Basson
  January 27, 2011
• World Rugby 2014 WR vs Mahlatse Chiliboy Ralepelle
  June 16, 2015

The South African Institute for Drugfree Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the rugby player Mahlatse Chiliboy Ralepelle after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Zeranol. After notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the SAIDS Disciplinary Panel.

This is the Athlete's 3rd anti-doping violation. His first postitive test in 2010 resulted in a No Fault or Negligence Decision and was settled with a reprimand. His 2014 positive test was considered a first anti-doping rule violation and a sanction of two years was imposed.

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the prohibited substance but could not explain how it entered his system. SAIDS requested the Panel to impose an 8 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete for his third anti-doping rule violations.

The Panel establish that under the Rules this is the Athlete's second anti-doping rule violation and that he failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional nor how the prohibited substance entered his system. Further the Panel considered that there were delays in the proceedings not attributed to the Athlete.

Therefore the SAIDS Disciplinary Panel decides on 25 June 2020 to impose an 8 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 17 January 2019.

In April 2019 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the rugby player Mhlanhla Mlondobozi after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Methyltestosterone.

After notification the Athlete waived his right for a hearing, accepted the test result, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by SAIDS.

SAIDS finds that the Athlete failed to establish that the violation was not intentional nor could he demonstrate that contaminated supplements were the source of the positive test.

Therefore SAIDS decides on 1 August 2019 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 25 April 2019.

In June 2019 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the bodybuilder Bafana Msiwa after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances 1-androstenedione (5α-androst-1-ene-3,17-dione), Furosemide, Mesterolone, Oxandrolone, Prednisolone and Prednisone.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete failed to respond to the SAIDS communications.
Without the Athlete's response SAIDS deems that the Athlete has accepted the test result, waived his right for a hearing and accepted the sanction proposed by SAIDS.

SAIDS finds that the Athlete's sample established the presence of multiple prohibited substances and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation.

Therefore SAIDS decides on 18 December 2019 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 13 June 2019.

In June 2019 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the bodybuilder Chante Louw after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cathine.

After notification the Athlete admitted the violation, waived her right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by SAIDS. The Athlete explained that she had used medication, as mentioned on the Doping Control Form, for her flu and she had used the substance to lose weight.

SAIDS finds that the Athlete's sample established the presence of a prohibited substance and accordingly that she committed an anti-doping rule violation. Further SAIDS accepts that the violation was not intentional and that the Athlete established how the substance entered her system.

With grounds for a reduced sanction SAIDS decides on 15 September 2019 to impose a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on 22 August 2019 since no provisional suspension was ordered.

In August 2019 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the netball player Sue-Ann Botha after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Salbutamol. After notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived her right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by SAIDS.

The Athlete denied the intentional use and stated that she had received limited to no anti-doping education. She explained with evidence that she had used the substance as prescribed medication to recover from swine flu symptoms while she had mentioned this medication on the Doping Control Form.

SAIDS finds that the Athlete's sample established the presence of a prohibited substance and accordingly that the Athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation. SAIDS accepts that the violation was not intentional and that the Athlete demonstrated how the substance entered her system.

Considering grounds for a reduced sanction SAIDS decides on 15 September 2019 to impose a 2 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 15 October 2019.

In September 2019 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the rugby player Renier Els after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Tamoxifen.

After notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived his right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by SAIDS.
The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and explained that he had used pills and the reason of use without corroborating evidence.

SAIDS finds that the Athlete's sample established the presence of a prohibited substance and accordingly that the Athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation. SAIDS accepts that the violation was not intentional and that the Athlete demonstrated how the substance entered his system.

Considering grounds for a reduced sanction SAIDS decides on 16 October 2019 to impose an 18 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 20 September 2019.

In October 2019 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the bodybuilder Khulekani Mkize after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances Furosemide and Tamoxifen. After notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived her right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by SAIDS.

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and explained what and for what reason he had used a product without corroborating evidence.

SAIDS finds that the Athlete's sample established the presence of a prohibited substance and accordingly that the Athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation. SAIDS accepts that the violation was not intentional and that the Athlete demonstrated how the substance entered his system.

Considering grounds for a reduced sanction SAIDS decides on 21 November 2019 to impose a 20 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 23 October 2019.

In October 2019 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the bodybuilder Stefan Marais for his refusal to submit to sample collection. After notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived his right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by SAIDS.

When the Athlete refused to provide a sample the Athlete already had admitted that he had used steroids and that his sample would test positive.

SAIDS concludes that the Athlete has committed an anti-doping rule violation and considers that the Athlete gave a prompt admission.
Therefore SAIDS decides on 21 November 2019 to impose a 3 year and 9 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 23 October 2019.

In November 2019 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the bodybuilder Lyle Singh after his sample tested positive for multiple prohibited substances: Boldenone, Drostanolone, Fluoxymesterone, Hydrochlorothiazide, Mestanolone, Mesterolone, Metenolone, Oxandrolone, Stanozolol, Tamoxifen and Triamterene.

After notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission, waived his right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by SAIDS.

SAIDS finds that the Athlete's sample established the presence of prohibited substances and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation. Therefore SAIDS decides on 22 November to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 14 September 2019.