FIFA 2019 FIFA vs Jesús Amado Rolón Caballero

20 May 2020

In December 2019 the International Football Federation (FIFA) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Paraguayan football player Jesús Amado Rolón Caballero after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Higenamine.

After notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the FIFA Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and requested for a reduced sanction due to no fault or negligence. He asserted that had never heard of Higenamine whereas his football team was already eliminated from the competiition at the material time.

He grew up in a poor region of Paraguay within the Guarani community where there is almost no access to most basis needs and education. Further he barely speaks a language other than Guarani and has limited acces to internet.

He stated that within his community the comsumption of infusions made from medicinal plants is very common to prevent and cure differen diseases. Following investigations into the source of the substance he believed that his consumption of these infusions made from natural ingredients - hojas de chirimoyas (custard apple leaves) - were the source of the prohibited substance.

FIFA's expert witness confirmed that the substance can be found in several plants used as traditional medicine in many countries. Yet, he deemed that there was a very low probability that the source of the Athlete's positive test was the consumption of tea made from hojas de chirimoyas.

The Disciplinary Committee 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.

Considering the evidence in this case the Committee concludes that the Ahtlete's violation was not intentional. However the Committee deems that the Athlete was unable to demonstrate that the source of the substance was the ingestion of infusions made with hojas de chirimoyas.

In view of the circumstances the Committee holds that the Athlete acted with significant fault as he failed to reseach the ingredients of the products he used. Nevertheless the Committee takes into account the Athlete's level of education, his limited access to internet and so limited access to anti-doping information.

Therefore the FIFA Disciplinary Committee decides on 20 May 2020 to impose a 20 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the decision.

FIFA 2019 FIFA vs Gastón Laduche Gerpe

28 Oct 2021

On 24 October 2019 the South American Football Confederation (CONMEBOL) Disciplinary Court decided to sanction the Uruguayan football player Gastón Laduche Gerpe after he tested positive for the prohibited substance Dorzolamide. Imposed was a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. 28 April 2019.

Hereafter in December 2019 the International Football Federation (FIFA) reported a new anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his A and B samples - collected on 21 November 2019 - tested again positive for the substance Dorzolamide in a low concentration.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the FIFA Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and argued that he acted without Fault or Negligence. He asserted with corroborating evidence that in this case the positive test results were caused by intoxacation. This resulted in his first anti-doping rule violation for which he was already sanctioned for 6 months by CONMEBOL.

In support the Athlete filed an AMIDEVA Laboratory Report that stated that the source of the positive test result were prescribed eye drops containing Dorzolamide, used by his grandparents for the treatment of ocular glaucoma.

Through environmental and involutary contamination at his home the substance came into his system whereas it has the characteristics to remain in blood and urine for months. To avoid further evironmental contamination in the house of his grantparents the Athlete had moved to another house.

In view of the the Athlete's AMIDEVA Report the FIFA's expert witness established that the found contration Dorzolamide in the Athlete's samples was 100 times lower than the Required Minimum Performance Levels defined in WADA Technical Document. The expert witness also confirmed that the source of origin had caused the positive tests in April 2019 as in November 2019 throug environmental contamination.

The FIFA Disciplinary Committee 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.

Considering the evidence in this case the Committee accepts that the violation was not intentional and that the Athlete demonstrated how the substance had entered his system. As a result the Committee deems that there are exceptional circumstances and that the Athlete acted with No Fault or Negligence.

Therefore on 28 October 2021 the FIFA Disciplinary Committee decides not to impose disciplinary consequences on the Athlete.

FIFA 2019 FIFA vs Erick Alejandro Rivera

14 Jun 2022

In October 2021 the  International Football Federation (FIFA) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Salvadorian football player Erick Alejandro Rivera after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Clostebol.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the FIFA Disciplinary Committee.

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and requested for a reduced sanction. In support he filed an anthropometric study that stated that his physiology had not changed the last years.

The Athlete assumed that one source of the substance could be the Dermovat cream he had used. Another source could be the injection administered by his football team doctor during treatment of his foot injury.

The Committee 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.

In view of the evidence the Committee establishes that the Dermovat cream in question does not contain prohibited substances. Also the Athlete only had received from his team doctor a Dexamethasone injection for his injury.

As a result the Committee concludes that without corroborating evidence the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional, nor how the substance had entered his system. The Committee dismissed the filed study because it was considered insufficient as corroborating evidence.

Therefore the FIFA Disciplinary Committee decides on 14 June 2022 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. 5 October 2021.

UKAD 2022 UKAD vs Ben Solder

26 Jul 2022

In May 2022 the United Kingdom Anti-Doping (UKAD) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the ice-hockey player Ben Solder after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cocaine.

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

The Athlete explained that he recreationally had used Cocaïn  assuming he would not be playing in the competition two days later. UKAD accepts that the use of the substance occurred out-of-competition.

Because the Athlete demonstrated that he underwent a Substance of Abuse treatment program UKAD reduced the sanction down to one month.

Therefore UKAD decides on 26 July 2022 to impose a 1 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete. Because the Athlete already served the sanction he is deemed eligible to participate in sport forthwith.

ITF 2020 ITF vs Anastasiya Shoshyna

17 Jun 2022

In November 2020 the International Tennis Federation (ITF) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Ukrainian-Polish tennis player Anastasiya Shoshyna after her A and B samples tested posititve for the prohibited substance Stanozolol.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement with evidence in her defence and she was heard for the ITF Independent Tribunal.

The Athlete accepted the test results, denied the intentional use of the substance and investigated the possible source of Stanozolol. Yet analysis of her supplements in three laboratories revealed no prohibited substances, neither was meat contamination established.

Hereafter - supported by expert witnesses - the Athlete asserted that she tested positive due to contamination. She alleged that at the material time she had direct contact / sexual relationship with a Person who used Stanozolol orally as part of his pre-training.

In addition the Athlete filed a hairtest in her defence to demonstrate that she had not used Stanozolol. She requested for non disclosure of the decision and asserted that there were grounds for a reduced sanction.

IFT contended that the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional, nor grounds for a reduced sanction. ITF rejected the Athlete's intimate contact hypothesis and the Person's alleged use of Stanozolol due to lack of substantial evidence in this matter.

The Panel assessed the Athlete's assertions and evidence about the intimate contact hypothesis, her relationship and the Person's use of Stanozolol. In this matter the Panel deems that there is no contemporaneous evidence, there are inconsistencies in the evidence and lack of plausable explantions.

As a result the Tribunal concludes that it is not satisfied that it was more likely than not that Stanozolol was transmitted through intimate contact between the Athlete and the Person. The Panel also did not accept the Athlete's hair test as corroborating evidence that she didn't act intentionally.

Finally the Panel considers that there had been delays in this case not attributed to the Athlete and determines that there are no grounds to prevent public disclosure of the decision.

Therefore the ITF Independent Tribunal decides on 17 June 2022 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 26 October 2020.

ITF 2021 ITF vs Alejandro Gomez

10 Aug 2022

In November 2021 the International Tennis Federation (ITF) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Colombian tennis player Alejandro Gomez after his A and B samples tested positive in a concentration above the WADA threshold.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. Finally the Athlete waived his right for a hearing, accepted the test results and the sanction proposed by ITF.

The Athlete denied the intentional or recreational use of the substance and established with experts how the substance had entered his system. He explained with evidence that his consumption of Sonora Soledad tea in a restaurant Bogota in October 2021 had caused the positive test result. Here he was unaware that this tea not only contained peppermint, yet also contained coca leaves.

In this matter the Montreal Lab confirmed that the found concentration in the Athlete's sample was consistent with his consumption of tea containing coca leaves. As a result the ITF accepts that the Athlete has demonstrated that the violation was not intentional and how the substance has entered his system. In view of the Athlete's conduct the ITF considers that he acted with No Significant Fault or Negligence.

Therefore the ITF decides on 10 August 2022 to impose a 14 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 15 December 2021.

ITF 2021 ITF vs Filip Pieczonka

1 Aug 2022

In October 2021 the International Tennis Federation (ITF) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Polish tennis player Filip Pieczonka after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Oxandrolone.

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

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and demonstrated with evidence that he had inadvertently ingested Anavar (Oxandrolone) from a contaminated Heviran container in August 2021 in order to manage his medical condition.

He testified that he was unaware that his father had used half-tablets of Anavar for his gym regime while the Athlete used half-tablets of Heviran as treatment for his eye infection. Both stored their half-tablets in identical small glass containers in their own tennis bags.

The Athlete acknowledged that he failed to mention his medication on the Doping Control Form as he assumed that it was not necessary to disclose because the medication is available in Poland without a prescription.

However his mother found the glass container in his father's bag containing fragments of Anavar. Because she assumed that this was her son's medication she added these fragments in the Athlete's glass container resulting in contamination of his Heviran tablets.

Testing in a Laboratory identified Oxandrolone in the residue of both containers. ITF also verified that both glass containers were identical, whereas the Athlete's Heviran container was labelled and the Anavar container was not.

ITF accepts that the Athlete has established that it is more likely than not that the presence of Oxandrolone found in the his sample was caused by his inadvertent ingestion of a half-tablet of Anavar from the contaminated Heviran container in August 2021 in the manner asserted by the Athlete, in an attempt to take Heviran prophylactically to manage his medical condition.

Considering the Athlete's conduct in this case ITF concludes that the violation was not intentional and that he had acted with No Significant Fault or Negligence.

Therefore the ITF decides on 1 August 2022 to impose an 18 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. 15 October 2021.

HED Matters 5 (2022) 1 (August)

29 Aug 2022

HED Matters 5 (2022) 1 (August)
Theme: Enhancement Drugs and the Criminal Justice System

Contents:

  • The Designer Anabolic Steroid Control Act: Confusion on Steroids / Anthony Roberts
  • Criminalization of Doping in Switzerland / Sena Hangartner
  • The regulation of anabolic-androgenic steroids in the UK: Priority, provision, and problems / Nick Gibbs
  • Enhancement drugs and (de)criminalisation / Niki Kiepek
  • Q&A with Rick Collins on Defending clients charged with matters involving anabolicandrogenic steroids and other enhancement drugs
  • Doping in Sport as a Criminal Offence in Japan / Kanako Takayama
  • Upcoming Events and Conferences
  • Achievements by HEDN Members

World Athletics 2021 WA vs Taye Girma Arit

15 Aug 2022

In August 2021 the Athletics Integrity Unit on behalf of World Athletics has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Ethiopian AthleteTaye Girma Arit after his samples - collected in April and in June 2021 - tested positive for the prohibited substance Recombinant Erythropoietin (rhEPO).

After notificattion a provisional suspension was ordered. After delays and extentions the Athlete filed a statement in his defence and there was a hearing for the World Athletics Disciplinary Tribunal.

The Athlete admitted the violation and denied the intentional use of the substance. He could not explain how the substance had entered his system and acknowledged that he was unable to dispute the accuracy of the test result. Neither could he demonstrate that there were grounds for No Significant Fault or Negligence.

The AIU contended that the Athlete intentionally had used rhEPO through two separate administrations and that there were grounds for aggravating circumstances. The Athlete only made protestations of innocence whereas he failed to challenge the evidence, nor demonstrated the source of the rhEPO.

The Panel agrees that the Athlete failed to establish with any corroborating evidence that the violation was not intentional, nor how the substance had entered his system. The Panel deems that there were aggravating circumstances in this case due to the Athlete deliberately has used rhEPO at least through two separate administrations.

Therefore the World Athletics Disciplinary Tribunal decides on 15 August 2022 to impose a 5 year and 4 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 3 August 2021.

World Athletics 2022 WA vs Igor Yerokhin

25 Aug 2022

Mr. Igor Yerokhin is a Russian Athlete who previously served a 2 year period of ineligibility until September 2010. Further a lifetime ban was imposed for an ABP violation as second violation including disqualification of his results since February 2011.

In 2016, Professor Richard McLaren issued two reports about systemic doping in Russia. These reports identified a significant number of Russian athletes who were involved in, or benefitted from, the doping schemes and practices that he uncovered.

Hereafter in January 2019 the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) recovered the internal database of the Moscow Laboratory (LIMS). Following investigation of allegations of organized doping practices, and in particular of the LIMS, WADA provided international federations with investigation reports on the athletes implicated in these organized doping practices.

As a result in May 2022 the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) of World Athletics reported a new anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Igor Yerokhin for the use of the prohibited substances GW1516 and Pseudoephedrine in May 2012.

After notification the Athlete failed to respond to the AIU communications. Without his response the AIU deems that he has waived his right to a hearing, to have accepted the asserted anti-doping rule violation and the sanction rendered by the AIU.

The AIU considers that already a lifetime ban was imposed on the Athlete for his second anti-doping rule violation including disqualification of his results since 25 February 2013. Under the Rules the AIU concludes that the 2012 violation shall be considered as a second violation together with the previous second violation committed.

Furthermore the AIU holds that the Athlete's 2012 violation can't be subject to a more severe sanction for the imposition of an additional period of ineligibility, nor disqualifation of his results.

Therefore the AIU decides on 25 August 2022 that the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation without further sanctions.

Category
  • Legal Source
  • Education
  • Science
  • Statistics
  • History
Country & language
  • Country
  • Language
Other filters
  • ADRV
  • Legal Terms
  • Sport/IFs
  • Other organisations
  • Laboratories
  • Analytical aspects
  • Doping classes
  • Substances
  • Medical terms
  • Various
  • Version
  • Document category
  • Document type
Publication period
Origin