In December 2023 the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (ADAK) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Caroline Jepchumba Kigen after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Testosterone.

Following notification ADAK was unable to locate the Athlete and she failed to respond. Thereupon the case was referred to the Kenya Sports Disputes Tribunal and a decision was rendered based on the written submissions of the Parties.

In view of the evidence the Panel finds that the presence of a prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that she committed an anti-doping rule violation. 

Without the Athlete's response the Panel deems that she failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional, nor how the substance had entered her system. Furthermore the Panel finds that there are no grounds for a reduced sanction.

Therefore the Panel decides on 23 May 2024 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 26 December 2023.

Related cases:

• AAA 2017 No. 01 17 0003 4443 USADA vs Gil Robers
  July 10, 2017
• CAS 2017_A_5296 WADA vs Gil Roberts
  January 25, 2018

In October 2023 the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Gil Roberts after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances Enobosarm (Ostarine), LGD-4033 (Ligandrol), RAD140 and SR9009.

Previously in June 2017 the Athlete established No Fault or Negligence when he tested positive for Probenecid. However in December 2022 he accepted a 16 month period of ineligibility for the presence of the prohibited substances Andarine and Ostarine.

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

USADA contended that the test result was valid and that the presence of multiple prohibited substances had been established. Accordingly USADA deemed that the Athlete intentionally had committed a third anti-doping rule violation.

The Athlete denied the intentional use of these substances and requested for a reduced sanction. Yet, he could not explain how these substances had entered his system.

He asserted that after the previous cases he was targeted by USADA and he disputed the UCLA Laboratory and the validity of the test result. Further he claimed that he was denied an opportunity to have his B sample tested.

The Sole Arbitrator assessed and addressed the evidence and the issues raised by the Parties and determines that:

• There were no departures of the ISL in the analysis of the Athlete's sample.
• The Athlete failed to provide any evidence that the UCLA Laboratory had departed from the ISL.
• The Athlete did not request that his B sample be opened and analysed within the set deadline.
• There is no evidence that he was subject to excessive testing as a form of retaliation or harassment on the part of USADA.
• The Athlete committed a second anti-doping rule violation and there are no grounds for a reduced sanction.
• The Athlete failed to establish that the violation was not intentional, nor how these substances had entered his system.

Therefore the Arbitration Tribunal decides on 18 June 2024 to impose an 8 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 17 October 2023.

In July 2023 the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the swimmer Kensy McMahon after her A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Vadadustat (AKB-6548).

Following notification a provisional suspens was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in her defence and she was heard for the New Era Alternative Dispute Resolution Arbitration Tribunal.

USADA contended that the Athlete failed to establish that the violation was not intentional. She also did not demonstrate with corroborating evidence how the prohibited substance had entered her system.

The Athlete accepted the test result and denied the intentional use of the substance. She asserted that she carefully checked the products she ingested and that she had been tested multiple times without issues.

After the positive test 18 medications and supplements had been analysed in laboratories and the Athlete also filed the results of a polygraph test and a hairtest. However the presence of Vadadustat was not detected in these 18 products in question.

Moreover she suggested that that the substance entered her system through ingestion from some form of unknown environmental contamination. Also she speculated that, during competition in Italy, one of cups used at the chaotic free-for-all feeding station contained Vadadustat. 

The Sole Arbitrator assessed and addressed the Parties' evidence and determines that:

• The presence of a prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete's samples.
• She committed an anti-doping rule violation.
• She failed to establish how Valdadustat entered her system.
• Unknown environmental contamination and alleged ingestion at the feeding station in Italy is mere speculation.
• The polygraph evidence gives little weight and the hair analysis has no relevance in this case.
• The Athlete is not a cheat, nor is there evidence that she acted intentionally or recklessly.
• She failed to demonstrate with corroborating evidence that the violation was not intentional.

Therefore the Arbitration Tribunal decides on 31 May 2024 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 7 July 2023.

In August 2023 the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Brazilian football player Joao Morellin after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Clomifene. Following notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence.

The Athlete's provided an explanation for the presence of Clomifene in his sample. Hereafter in April 2024 he failed to provide additional explanations to the CCES.

In view of the Athlete's explanation and based on his degree of fault CCES proposed a reduced sanction. Thereupon in May 2024 the Athlete failed to dispute the violation within the timelines specified in the CADP and the Notice of Charge.

Therefore the CCES decides on 11 June 2024 to impose an 18 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on 8 May 2024.

In October 2023 the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (ADAK) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Rosemary Chelangat after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Erythropoietin (EPO).

Following notification ADAK was unable to locate the Athlete and she failed to respond. Thereupon the case was referred to the Kenya Sports Disputes Tribunal and a decision was rendered based on the written submissions of the Parties.

In view of the evidence the Panel finds that the presence of a prohibited substance has been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that she committed an anti-doping rule violation. 

Without the Athlete's response the Panel deems that she failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional, nor how the substance had entered her system. Furthermore the Panel finds that there are no grounds for a reduced sanction.

Therefore the Panel decides on 25 April 2024 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 29 October 2023.

Related case:

ADAK 2022 ADAK vs Mathew Kiplagat Sawe
June 29, 2023

In June 2022 the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (ADAK) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Mathew Kiplagat Sawe after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Triamcinolone acetonide.

Consequently the Panel of the Kenya Sports Disputes Tribunal decided on 29 June 2023 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on 11 July 2022 until 10 July 2026.

During the proceedings the Athlete alleged with medical records that he underwent medical treatment in a hospital. However ADAK established that these medical records were falsifications.

As a result in August 2023 ADAK reported a second anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete for tampering with any part of the doping control. Thereupon the Athlete failed to respond, nor attended the hearing of the Tribunal.

In view of the evidence the Panel determines that the Athlete had produced falsified medical records. Without the Athlete's response the Panel deems that the Athlete had waived his right to be heard.

Therefore the Panel decides on 29 February 2024 to impose another 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date the period of ineligiblility shall end of his first anti-doping rule violation, i.e. on 10 July 2026 to 9 July 2030.

In December 2023 the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (ADAK) reported and anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Brenda Jerotich Kiprono after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone).

Following notification ADAK was unable to locate the Athlete. Moreover the Athlete failed to respond, nor attended the hearing of the Kenya Sports Disputes Tribunal.

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

Without the Athlete's response the Panel deems that the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional, nor how the substance had entered her system. Furthermore the Panel finds that there are no grounds for a reduced sanction.

Therefore the Panel decides on 2 May 2024 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 26 December 2023.

In May 2023 the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (ADAK) alleged that the Athlete Evangeline Makena Kathenya had committed two anti-doping rule violations. ADAK reported that her two samples, provided on 10 and 31 March 2023, tested positive for the prohibited substances Prednisolone, Prednisone and Triamcinolone acetonide.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in her defence and she was heard for the Kenya Sports Disputes Tribunal.

The Athlete gave a prompt admission and denied the intentional use of the substances. She explained without medical evidence that she had used these products for her injury.

The Panel finds that the presence of the prohibited substances have been established in the Athelte's samples and accordingly that she committed an anti-doping rule violation. The Panel accepts that the athlete's violation was not intentional and that she demonstrated how the substances had entered her system.

Therefore the Panel decides on 26 October 2023 to impose an 18 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 25 May 2023.

Related case:

ADAK 2022 ADAK vs Agatha Jeruto Kimaswai
March 2, 2023

On 2 March 2023 the Kenya Sports Disputes Tribunal decided to impose a 2 year period of inelgibility on the Athlete Agatha Jeruto Kimaswai after she tested positive for the prohibited substance Clomifene.

In first instance the Tribunal deemed that the Athlete demonstrated the source of the prohibited substance and that the violation was not intentional although she acted negligently.

Hereafter in March 2023 the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) appealed this Decision with the Appeal Tribunal. WADA requested the Panel to set aside the Appealed Decision and to impose a more severe sanction on the Athlete.

WADA contended that in first instance the Panel was unaware that the Athlete previously was sanctioned for 4 years in 2015 and accordingly that she had committed a second anti-doping rule violation. Furthermore WADA argued that there were no grounds for No Significant Fault or Negligence.

The Athlete denied that in 2015 she had committed multiple violations, nor had ADAK mentioned her first violation. Moreover the present violation was not intentional and there are no grounds in this Appeal for a more sever sanction.

The Appeal Panel determines that WADA's evidence was admissible and showed that prior the Athlete had committed a first anti-doping rule violation. The Panel finds that the second violation was committed within the period of 10 years and that there are grounds for a more severe sanction.

Therefore the Appeal Tribunal decides on 23 November 2023 to set aside the Appealed Decision and to impose a 6 year period of inelgibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 10 March 2022.

In March 2023 the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (ADAK) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Stephen Kipchirchir Kiplagat after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances Androsterone and Etiocholanolone.

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

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substances and explained at the material time he had some setbacks in his life and medical problems. He stated that as treatment for his medical condition a medication had been administered at a pharmacy.

The Panel finds that the presence of the prohibited substances had been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation.

The Panel deems that the Athlete failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional, nor how the substances had entered his system. He did not produce any corroborating evidence in support of his allegations, neither that he acted with No Significant Fault or Negligence.

Therefore the Kenya Sports Disputes Tribunal decides on 18 April 2024 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 17 April 2023.