In Mei 2024 the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU), on behalf of World Athletics, reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Kenyan Athlete Reuben Kiprop Kipyego. The AIU deemed that the Athlete had 3 Whereabouts Failures within a 12 month period:

• a Missed Test and Filing Failure on 8 September 2023;
• a Missed Test and Filing Failure on 5 January 2024; and
• a Filing Failure on 12 March 2024.

After notification a provisional suspension was ordered while the Athlete failed to respond to the communications of the AIU. Because of his failure to respond to the charge within the set deadline the AIU deems that the Athlete has admitted the anti-doping rule violation, waived his right for a hearing and accepted the consequences thereupon.

Therefore the AIU decides on 17 July 2024 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 27 Mai 2024.

In August 2023 NADO Flanders reported an anti-doping rule violations against the bodybuilder after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Hydrochlorothiazide and the presence of Salbutamol.

After notification the Athlete failed to respond, nor attended the hearing of the NADO Flanders Disciplinary Commission. The Commission rendered a decision in absentia of the Athlete.

Because she did not respond in March 2024 within the set deadline, the Disciplinary Commission determines that the Athlete was deemed to have waived her right for a hearing and accepted the consequences.

Therefore the NADO Flanders Disciplinary Commission decides on 28 May 2024 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 15 August 2023.

Fees and expenses for this Commission shall be borne partially by the Athlete.

In September 2023 United Kingdom Anti-Doping (UKAD) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Finnish boxer Robert Helenius after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Clomifene. Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete filed a statement in his defence.

The Athlete admitted the violation and denied the intentional use of the substance. He assumed that the Clomifene entered his system through the consumption of eggs and chicken meat in his diet.

UKAD accepted that the Athlete's violation was not intentional. However UKAD deemed that he failed to demonstrate with any corroborating evidence that eggs and chicken meat in question were the source of the prohibited substance.

Therefore UKAD decides on 27 June 2024 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 18 September 2023.

In March 2024 Drug Free Sport New Zealand (DFSNZ) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the football player Inoke Taragalailai after his samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis in a concentration above the WADA threshold.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Sports Tribunal of New Zealand.

The Athlete admitted the violation and denied the intentional use of the substance. He requested for a proportional sanction and argued that there had been substantial delays in the proceedings.

DFSNZ accepted that the Athlete's use of Cannabis was not intentional, yet denied that there had been substantial delays. It deemed that the violation was in-competition and that there are no grounds for a proportional reduced sanction.

The Panel considered whether there are grounds for a proportional reduced sanction and whether there had been substantial delays in the testing of the sample not attributed to the Panel. Because there was a Panel majority opinion there was also a dissenting decision rendered.

The Panel assessed and addressed the Parties arguments and a majority concludes that there are grounds for a proportional reduced sanction despite the violation was in-competition. In view of the circumstances the Panel majority agrees that there had been substantial delays not attributed to the Athlete.

Therefore the majority of the Panel decides on 3 July 2024 to impose an 8 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting backdated on 14 December 2023.

In September 2022 the International Equestrian Federation (FEI) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Spanish rider Agusti Juan Elias Lara after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Clenbuterol.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the FEI Tribunal.

The Athlete accepted the test result and denied the intentional use of the substance. He requested for a reduced sanction and argued that he was tested before without issues.

With support of expert witnesses the Athlete argued that there was cross contamination with Clenbuterol. He explained that the substance entered his system when he administered a prescribed Spasmobronchal medication to his horse.

He asserted that during administration of this medication he didn't use protective gear whereas he was not warned by his veterinarian that this medication contained Clenbuterol. Further he acknowledged that he had not checked if his supplements contained banned substances.

FEI and its expert witnesses assessed and addressed the Athlete's evidence and deemed that the possibility was highly improbable of the Athlete's contamination by a Spasmobronchal medication being the source of the positive sample.

FEI considered that more likely sources existed from which the prohibited substance may have entered his system. Consequently FEI contended that the Athlete did not establish the source of the prohibited substance, nor evidence that he acted not intentionally.

The Panel 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 Panel finds that the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional, nor the source of the prohibited substance. Moreover the Panel concludes that there are no grounds for a reduced sanction.

Therefore the FEI Tribunal decides on 4 June 2024 to impose a fine and a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 1 September 2022.

In July 2024 the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU), on behalf on World Athletics, reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Kenyan Athlete Daniel Muindi after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone).

After notification the Athlete timely admitted the violation, waived his right for a hearing, accepted a provisional suspension and the sanction proposed by the AIU.

The AIU determines that the Athlete failed to establish that the violation was not intentional. Because he had signed and submitted the Admission of Anti-Doping Rule Violations and Acceptance of Consequences Form he received a 1 year reduction from the AIU.

Therefore the AIU decides on 15 July 2024 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 10 July 2024.

In May 2024 the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU), on behalf of World Athletics, reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Kenya Athlete Judith Jerubet  after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Triamcinolone acetonide.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered. Thereupon the Athlete failed to respond to the AIU communications.

Because she did not respond within the set deadline the AIU determines in July 2024 that the Athlete was deemed to have waived her right for a hearing and accepted the consequences. Moreover the AIU determines that she had had failed to sign and submit the Admission of Anti-Doping Rule Violations and Acceptance of Consequences Form.

Therefore the AIU decides on 15 July 2024 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 7 June 2024.

Related case:

TJD-AD 2023-002 Disciplinary Decision - Football
October 13, 2023

In March 2023 the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) reported two anti-doping rule violations:

• against the football player after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone).
• against his sports doctor for the administration of the prohibited substance.

Consequently the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD) decided on 16 October 2023:

• to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 4 March 2023.
• to impose a 30 year sanction on the doctor and to report his conduct to the Federal Council of Medicine and the Brazilian Society of Sports Exercise Medicine.

The Panel ruled that there was no medical justification for the use of Nandrolone as treatment for the Athlete's injury. No medical evidence had been produced, nor was there an application of a TUE.

Hereafter the Athlete and the doctor appealed the Decision with the TJD-AD Appeal Panel. Yet, in view of the evidence, the Rapporteur dismissed the doctor's appeal completely.

Regarding the Athlete the Rapporteur considers his actions as intentional and as an anti-doping rule violation. Nevertheless, he acknowledged the Athlete's substantial assistance in the case against the doctor which accordingly serves as a justification for a reduction of his sanction.

Therefore the TJD-AD Appeal Panel decides on 21 February 2024:

• to dismiss the doctors appeal and to uphold the sanction of 30 years; and
• to set aside the 4 year sanction imposed on the Athlete and to impose a 2 year sanction because of his substantial assistance in the case against the doctor.

Related case:

TJD-AD 2023-001 Disciplinary Decision – Athletics
March 5, 2023

On 3 May 2023 the Brazilian Sports Justice Anti-Doping Tribunal (TJD-AD Panel) decides on 3 May 2023 to impose a 16 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete for 3 Whereabouts Failures within a 12 month period:

• a Filing Failure on 31 March 2021;
• a Missed Test on 8 November 2021;
• a Missed Test on 5 March 2022

In first instance the Rapporteur concluded that the Athlete acted negligently regarding his Whereabouts Failures. Nevertheless he accepted that the violation was not intentional and that there are grounds for a reduced sanction.

Hereafter in May 2023 the Athlete appealed the Decision with the TJD-AD Appeal Panel. 

Following assessment of the evidence regarding the Athlete's first Whereabouts Failure the Rapporteur determines that several failures had occurred:

• In the Notification to the Athlete the deadline to update Whereabouts in ADAMS was incorrect set on 20 March 2021 instead of 31 March 2021;
• An e-mail addressed to ABCD was found confirming that the Athlete indeed had updated his Whereabouts information.
• As a result the 1st Whereabouts Failure should not have been recorded.
• Accordingly the Athlete had not committed an anti-doping rule violation for 3 Whereabouts Failures within a 12 month period.

Therefore the TJD-AD Appeal Panel decides on 18 October 2023 by majority to set aside the Appealed Decision of 3 May 2023 and to acquit the Athlete.

Related case:

TJD-AD 2023-003 Disciplinary Decision - Football
July 10, 2023

On 10 July 2023 the TJD-AD Panel decided to impose an 8 month period of ineligibility on the football player after he tested positive for the prohibited substance Tamoxifen.

In first instance the TJD-AD Panel deemed that the violation was not intentional and that the Athlete acted with some degree of negligence. The Panel accepted that he by mistake had purchased and used Tamoxifen Citrate instead of Tadalafil Citrate.

Herafter the Brazilian Doping Control Authority (ABCD) appealed this Decision with the TJD-AD Appeal Panel. ABCD requested the Panel to set aside the Appealed Decision and to impose a more servere sanction on the Athlete.

ABCD contended that the Athlete had not demonstrated how the substance had entered his system. Moreover he failed to produce corroborating evidence that he indeed had purchased Tamoxifen Citrate instead of Tadalafil Citrate in a pharmacy.

The Athlete admitted the violation and denied he acted intentionally. He asserted that he had cooperated with the proceedings and that only a low concentration of the substance was found in his samples.

Although Tamoxifen was used by athletes to treat the side effects of anabolic steroids, he argued that no other prohibited substances had been detected in his samples. He acknowledged that he had not checked his medication after purchase in the pharmacy.

The Rapporteur upholds the conclusion that the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation. He finds that he failed to demonstrate how the substance had entered his system.

The Rapporteur regards that the Athlete had not mentioned his medication on the Doping Control Form, nor produced corroborating evidence about the alleged purchase of his medication in the pharmacy.

Further the Rapporteur holds that there are inconsistencies in the Athlete's explanation that the original medication was used to improve his erectile function without a prescription. He failed to check his medication, nor made an application for a TUE.

Therefore the TJD-AD Appeal Panel decides on 18 October 2023 to annul the Appealed Decision and to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the sample collection, i.e. on 11 November 2022.