In December 2023 the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (ADAK) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Alex Kiprop Lagat after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone).

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

Therefore the Kenya Sports Disputes Tribunal decides on 14 February 2024 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 26 December 2023.

In January 2024 the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (ADAK) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Kevin Nash Kipkemoi after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone (Nandrolone).

Following notification the Athlete timely admitted the violation, waived his right for a hearing and accepted the sanction proposed by ADAK. 

Therefore the Kenya Sports Disputes Tribunal decides on 5 February 2024 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the decision.

In January 2023 the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (ADAK) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Victor Koskey after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances Salbutamol and Trimetazidine.

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

Therefore the Kenya Sports Disputes Tribunal decides on 14 February 2024 to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 13 February 2023.

In April 2022 an Expert Panel of the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) concluded unanimously in their Joint Expert Opinion that the hematological profile of the Kenyan Athlete Rhonex Kipruto “highly likely” showed that he had used a prohibited substance or a prohibited method: the use of EPO or Blood doping. 

This conclusion of the AIU Expert Panel was based on assessment of blood samples, collected in the period from 9 July 2018 until 15 March 2022 reported in the Athlete’s Biological Passport (ABP). 

After notification the Athlete submitted multiple explanations with documentation for the abnormal values in his ABP. However after consideration the Expert Panel rejected the Athlete’s explanations and arguments in their 2nd (August 2022), 3rd (May 2023) and 4th (February 2024) Joint Expert Opinions.

Consequently in May 2023 the AIU, on behalf of World Athletics, reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete. Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete was heard for the World Athletics Disciplinary Tribunal. 

The AIU deems that the abnormalities in the Athlete's ABP were caused by a prohibited method and that he failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional.

Further the AIU contended that there are aggravating circumstances present in this case because the Athlete had used blood doping for more than 3 years and he had been engaged in a deliberate and sophisticated doping regime.

The Athlete denied the charges and claimed that the abnormalities in his ABP are due to natural and specific characteristics of his body and other circumstances like alcohol consumption and medical conditions. Moreover he relied on de validity of sample 2; genetic disorder; alcohol abuse; and the model presented by his expert witness.

The Panel assessed and addressed the evidence and issues raised by the Parties and determines:

• World Athletics has discharged its burden of proof and established that the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation.
• The abnormalities in the Athlete's ABP are more likely caused by blood manipulation, rather than from evironmental or medical factors.
• There was evidence that the Athlete was engaged in a deliberate and sophisticated doping regime.
• There are aggravating circumstances present in this case that justifies the imposition of a more severe sanction.

Therefore the Panel decides on 28 May 2024 to impose a 6 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 11 May 2023.

In September 2023 the India National Anti-Doping Agency (INADA) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the powerlifter Akash Sharma after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances Metandienone and Trenbolone. 

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the  Athlete was heard for the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of India (ADDPI).

The Athlete admitted the violation, denied the intentional use of the substances and requested for a reduced sanction. INADA contended that there are no grounds for a reduced sanction and that the Athlete clearly had committed an anti-doping rule violation.

The Panel finds that the presence of the prohibited substances have been established in the Athlete's sample and accordingly that he committed an anti-doping rule violation. The Panel deems that there are no grounds for a reduced sanction.

Therefore the ADDPI decides on 6 April 2024 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 6 Septemer 2024.

In August 2023 the India National Anti-Doping Agency (INADA) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Akash Kumar Patel. INADA charged the Athlete for his 3 Whereabouts Failures an 1 Missed Test within a 12 month period:

• 1 Q1 Filing Failure recorded on 17 March 2023;
• 1 Q2 Filing Failure recorded on 9 June 2023;
• 1 Filing Failure & 1 Missed Test, recorded on 9 August 2023.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of India (ADDPI).

The Athlete admitted his fault and stated that he was unaware how to file his whereabouts information. The Panel deems that he had committed an anti-doping rule violation because of his Whereabouts Failures and that there are no grounds for a reduced sanction.

Therefore the ADDPI decides on 15 March 2024 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 10 August 2023.

ADDPI 2023_164 INADA vs G.

In August 2023 the India National Anti-Doping Agency (INADA) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete G. Lakshmanan. INADA charged the Athlete for his 3 Whereabouts Failures an 1 Missed Test within a 12 month period:

• 1 Q3 Filing Failure recorded on 29 December 2022;
• 1 Q4 Filing Failure recorded on 31 December 2022;
• 1 Filing Failure & 1 Missed Test on 26 March 2023, recorded on 9 August 2023.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of India (ADDPI).

The Athlete acknowledged his 3 Filing Failures. However he challenged the Missed test in March 2022 and requested for a reduced sanction.

At the material time he suffered from an injury and had to travel to his place to take care of his daughter who was seriously ill. Moreover he asserted that he had technical issues in his attempt to update his Whereabouts information.

The Panel did not accept the Athlete's explanation and finds that he had committed an anti-doping rule violation. The Panel deems that the Athlete failed timely to update his Whereabouts information.

Therefore the ADDPI decides on 19 March 2024 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 10 August 2023.

In April 2023 the India National Anti-Doping Agency (INADA) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substances Anastrozole, Drostanolone, Mephentermine, Phentermine and Stanozolol.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the  Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard for the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of India (ADDPI).

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substances. He was tested for the first time and had already had ceased participating into championships.

The Panel finds that the presence of multiple prohibited substance have 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. Further the Panel determines that there are aggravating circumstances present in this case for the imposition of a more severe sanction.

Therefore the ADDPI decides on 14 March 2024 to impose a 6 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 12 May 2023.

In August 2023 the India National Anti-Doping Agency (INADA) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Rajinder Singh after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substances Mephentermine, Phentermine and Stanozolol.

Following notification a provisional suspension was ordered and he was heard for the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of India (ADDPI).

The Athlete accepted the test result, denied the intentional use of the substance and could not explain how the substance had entered his system. He asserted that he acted with a light degree of fault and requested for a reduced sanction.

INADA contended that the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation and there are no grounds for a reduced sanction. It argued that the Athlete failed to demonstrate with corroborating evidence that products he had use had been spiked.

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 violation was intentional and that the Athlete failed to demonstrate with corroborating that his products he used had been spiked.

Therefore ADDPI decides on 28 February 2024 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 1 August 2023.

In July 2023 the India National Anti-Doping Agency (INADA) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the water polo player Sukhpreet Kaur after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Clomifene.

Folowing notification the Athlete did not accept a provisional suspension. She filed a statement in her defence and was heard for the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of India (ADDPI).

The Athlete accepted the test result and denied the intentional use of the substance. She explained with evidence that she had used prescribed medication to get pregnant.

INADA deemed that the Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation and acted negligently with her medication. She failed to mention her medication on the Doping Control Form, neither did she made an application for a TUE.

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.

The Panel accepts that the Athlete has demonstrated how the substance had entered her system. Yet, it deems that she acted negligently and failed to research her medication.

Therefore the Panel decides on 14 February 2024 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the decision.