Related case:

TJD-AD 2021-024 Appeal Decision - Cycling
October 5, 2021

In November 2020 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the cyclist after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Higenamine.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordedered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD).

The Athlete admitted the violation and stated that he had purchased and used a pre-workout supplement Muscle Pump. He acknowledged that he wanted to improve his sports performance and claimed that he was unaware that Higenamine was a prohibited substance.

The TJD-AD Rapporteur finds that the presence of a prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation.

The Rapporteur considers the Athlete's conduct in this case and concludes that the Athlete intentionally had used the supplement to improve his sports performance and failed to mention this supplement on the Doping Control Form. The Rapporteur deems that the Athlete had acted with a hight degree of guild and that there are no mitigating or aggravating circumstances.

Therefore the TJD-AD decides on 1 July 2021 to impose a 40 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. 21 January 2021.

In October 2020 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the football player after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Isometheptene.

After notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence and the case was referred to the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD). 

The Athlete declined an acceptance of sanction of 6 months proposed by ABCD, accepted the test results and denied the intentional use of the substance. He requested for a reduced sanction due to No Significant Fault or Negligence.

He asserted that the source of the prohibited substance was an unprescribed medication Doralgin he had used for his headache. The Brazil Lab confirmed that the positive test result was consistent with the Athlete’s use of this medication. 

The TJD-AD Rapporteur finds that the presence of a prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete’s samples and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation.

The Rapporteur accepts that the violation was not intentional and that there are grounds for a reduced sanction in view of the Athlete’s degree of fault. Further the Rapporteur considers that in similar cases reduced sanctions were imposed by the TJD-AD and that there were delays in the proceedings not attributed to the Athlete. 

Therefore the TJD-AD Panel dedices on 22 April 2021 to impose a 12 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 1 September 2020.

In August 2020 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) reported two anti-doping rule violations against his the cyclist for evasion and tampering. The Athlete claimed that he immediately had left the competition in July 2019 because his wife was admitted in the hospital. 

The ABCD investigation revealed that the Athlete’s wife had not been involved in a hospital admittance at all, the Athlete gave false statements and the corroborating medical documents he had provided were falsifications. Accordingly an 8 year period of ineligibility was imposed on the Athlete for committing two separate anti-doping rule violations. 

Hereafter the Athlete appealed the Decision with the TJD-AD Appeal Panel. In his defence the Athlete denied the charges, disputed the delays in the proceedings and refuted with explanations the charges. 

Based on the evidence in this case the TJD-AD Rapporteur rejected the Athlete’s assertions regarding the notification, the role of a corroborating witness and the alleged hospital admittance of his wife. Further the Rapporteur holds that the delays in the proceedings were attributed to the Athlete because the ABCD had to conduct an investigation into the Athlete’s assertions.

Accordingly the Rapporteur concludes that the Athlete intentionally had committed an anti-doping rule violation for evasion and thereafter had committed a second anti-doping rule violation for tampering. 

Therefore the TJD-AD Appeal Panel decides on 22 May 2021 to dismiss the Athlete’s appeal and to confirm the imposition of an 8 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 13 August 2020.

Related case:

TJD-AD 2021-001 Disciplinary Decision - Triathlon
February 23, 2021

On 18 June 2021 the TJD-AD Tribunal decided to approve the settlement agreement between the triathlon Athlete and the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) after the Athlete tested positive for the prohibited substances Androsterone,  Etiocholanolone, Testosterone and its adiols.

As a result of the settlement agreement the appeals filed by both parties were withdrawn.

In January 2020 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the volleyball player after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis in a high concentration above the WADA threshold.

After notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence and the case was referred to the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD). 

The Athlete gave a prompt admission, denied the intentional use of the substance and accepted a provisional suspension. He acknowledged that he was struggling with addiction problems after a motorcycle accident in 2012. 

The TJD-AD Rapporteur finds that the presence of the prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete’s sample and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation. The Rapporteur accepts that the violation was not intentional and considers that the Athlete gave a prompt admission. 

Therefore the TJD-AD Panel decides on 22 April 2021 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 13 December 2019.

An appeal with the TJD-AD was filed after reports in the media that a State Football Federation had conducted fraudulent Doping Control Proceedings during a football championship, without supervision of the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD), and repeatedly had charged fees to football clubs for non existing doping controls proceedings. 

The ABCD established that it was not involved because it had no sample collections scheduled at all for this championschip in question in that season. Accordingly the ABCD finds that these alleged fraudulent matters were no violations of the Brazilian Anti-Doping Code (CBA), yet violations of the Brazilian Code of Sports Justice (CBJD). 

The TJD-AD agrees that the appeal is inadmissible because it has no competence under CBA. However because there is evidence of charging fees to football clubs for no existing doping control proceedings the TJD-AD deems on 9 June 2021 that this matter must be transferred and settled by the State Court of Sport Justice for Football.

In November 202 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the cyclist after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substances Canrenone, Modafinil and Oxandrolone.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in her defence and the case was referred to the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD). 

The Athlete accepted the test result and denied the intentional use of the substances. She asserted that she ony had used the supplements and medication she had mentioned on the Doping Control Form and requested for a reduced sanction. 

The TJD-AD Reporteur finds that the presence of the prohibited substances has been established in the Athlete’s sample and accordingly that she committed an anti-doping rule violation. The Athlete failed to establish that the violation was not intentional, nor grounds for a reduced sanction. 

Therefore the TJD-AD Panel decides on 5 May 2021 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. 23 November 2020.

Related case:

TJD-AD 2021-023 Appeal Decision - Football
September 30, 201

In March 2021 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the football player after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substances Hydrochlorothiazide and Sibutramine.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD).

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substances and he requested for a reduced sanction. He believed that the medical herbal supplement he had used - purchased on the internet - was the source of the prohibited substances.

Analysis of the open bottle of this supplement in question in the Rio Lab confirmed the presence of the prohibited substances, yet not in the sealed bottles of this product from the same batch that had been analysed.

The TJD-AD Rapporteur finds that the presence of  prohibited substances has been established in the Athlete's samples and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation. 

The Rapporteur considered the circumstances and the Athlete's conduct in this case in view of the setbacks in his personal life and deems that the violation was not intentional.

The Rapporteur establishes that the label of the product did not list the prohibited substances although the Athlete failed to demonstrate sufficiently that this product in question was the source of the substances.

Further the Rapporteur regards that the Athlete acted with some degree of negligence whereas he had received anti-doping education and had not mentioned the supplement on the Doping Control Form.

Therefore the TJD-AD decides on 16 August 2021 to impose an 8 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 9 March 2021.

Related case:

TJD-AD 2021-021 Appeal Decision - Football
September 14, 2021

In October 2019 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the football player after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Enobosarm (Ostarine). After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete filed a statement in his defence.

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and stated that all the supplements he had used were provided by his football club. At first the analysis of these supplements in the Rio Lab did not reveal prohibited substances. Yet analysis of another batch of these supplements from a compounding pharmacy, provided to the Athlete after the Doping Control in August 2019, confirmed the presence of traces of Ostarine and Anastrozole in two products.

ABCD disputed the admissibility of the analysis of the second batch due to these supplements were compounded and provided to ABCD after the Doping Control and due to these supplements were delivered in unsealed condition.

The Rapporteur finds that the presence of a prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation.

Based on the evidence the Rapporteur concludes that the violation was not intentional and that a contaminated supplement was the source of the positive test.

The Rapporteur considers that the Notification after 2 months hampered the Athlete in finding the source of the contamination, whereas he was tested before without issues. Further the Athlete's conduct was considered and his degree of negligence since he failed to mention his supplements on the Doping Control Form

Therefore the TJD-AD decides on 14 May 2021 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 8 August 2019.

Related case:

TJD-AD 2021-008 Disciplinary Decision - Cycling
April 5, 2021

In April 2021 the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD) decided to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the cyclist after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Erythropoietin (EPO), starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 13 November 2019. 

Hereafter in April 2021 the Athlete appealed the Decision with the TJD-AD Appeal Panel and requested for a reduced sanction and the start of the sanction on the date of the sample collection. 

In view of the evidence the Rapporteur finds that the presence of the prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete’s sample and accordingly that he intentionally had committed an anti-doping rule violation.

Further the Rapporteur holds that after notification the Athlete gave a prompt admission but declined to accept and Admission Agreement with a sanction reduction of 3 months. 

The Rapporteur deems that there are no grounds for a reduction of the 4 year sanction, yet he considers that there were substantial delays in the proceedings not attributed to the Athlete to allow the start of the sanction on the date of the sample collection. 

Therefore the TJD-AD Appeal Panel decides on 30 June 2021 to uphold the imposed 4 year period of ineligibility, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 27 September 2019.