In September 2013 the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Helga Mathee after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Betamethasone. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement with evidence in her defence and was heard for the SAIDS Disciplinary Panel.

The Athlete stated, sustained by medical records of her doctor and physiotherapist, that she suffered from piriformis muscle syndrome which was treated through administration of celestone soluspan injections containing the substance betamethasone.
Due to the Athlete was previously treated without success with other medication. The celestone soluspan was administered on 23 May 2013. A TUE application made by the Athlete for the use of betamethasone was denied by SAIDS on 22 August 2013.

The Panel concludes that the Athlete was incorrectly advised that the substance would not linger long in her system before the competition and that the substance was used as treatment for her medical condition. The Panel finds that the Athlete and her practitioner had made some effort to research use of the medication, including internet search but failed to act with utmost care.
Without intention to enhance her sport performance the SAIDS Disciplinary Panel decides on 12 September 2013 to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete. The sanction will start on the date of the SAIDS notification to apply for a retroactively TUE, i.e. on 1 August 2013.

The South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance cannabis.
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete was heard for the SAIDS Disciplinary Panel.

The Athlete admitted the violation and stated that he smoked an OKA piped two days before the competition, which was spiked with cannabis by a friend as act of jealously.

Without intention to enhance his sport performance and with a low degree of fault the SAIDS Disciplinary Panel decides on 23 October 2012 to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on de date of the notification, i.e. on 11 September 2012.

Related case:

SAIDS 2014 SAIDS vs Lindhikaya Mthangayi
May 12, 2014

In September 2009 Athletics South Africa (ASA) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the South African Athlete Lindhikaya Mthangayi after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine).

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

The Athlete stated that due to the death of his brother he suffered from stress and headaches and therefore he used Adcodol tablets and also with several supplements for training. The Athlete admitted that he was careless and expressed his apologies.

The Committee concludes that the Athlete didn’t know that the supplement AMH Ultrate contained the prohibited substance and that he had no intention to enhance his sport performance.

Considering the circumstances the AS Disciplinary Committee decides on 9 April 2010 to impose a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 8 October 2009.

Facts
The French Federation of Ice Sports (Fédération Française des Sports de Glace, FFSG) charges respondent M30 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on November 13, 2004, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of ephedrine which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
Respondent had used drops as medication while exercising in Slovakia, this medication is the cause of the positive test. He claims not to have any knowledge about the prohibited substance in the medication.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of six months, from which two months conditionally, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the (FFSG).
2. The decision will starts after June 1, 2005.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Related cases:

• World Rugby 2014 WR vs Mahlatse Chiliboy Ralepelle
  June 16, 2015
• SAIDS 2019_18 SAIDS vs Mahlatse Chiliboy Ralepelle
  June 25, 2020

In November 2010 the South African Rugby Union (SARU) has reported two anti-doping rule violations against the South African rugby players Mahlatse Chiliboy Ralepelle and Bjorn Basson after their A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substances methylhexaneamine (dimethylpentylamine).
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athletes filed the statements with evidence in their defence and were heard for the SARU Judicial Committee.

The Athlete’s admitted the violation and stated that they, together with the rest of the Springbok team, consumed a nutritional supplement Anabolic Nitro Oxide Extreme Energy Surge, which contained the prohibited substance, prior to the doping test on 6 November 2010 in Ireland. The supplement was used before by the players during the season without problems with the doping tests.

The Athlete’s coach testified that during the Springbok tour in Ireland and the UK, the team was supplied with a batch of the supplement manufactured in the UK and also with a covering certificate from a recognized laboratory. Hereafter both the batch of the supplement supplied in in the UK and the batch produeced in South Africa were tested. The sample manufactured in South Africa tested negative and the UK sample tested positive for methylhexaneamine.

The Committee accepts the statements and evidence of the Athletes and concludes that they didn’t know that the supplement was contaminated and acted with no fault and no intention to enhance their sport performance.
Considering the exceptional circumstances the SARU Judicial Committee decides on 27 January 2011 to impose only a reprimand on the two Athletes.

Facts
The French Basketball Federation (Fédération Française de Basket-Ball, FFBB) charges respondent M22 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on September 18, 2004, a sample was taken for doping tests purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent admits the use of cannabis.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 2 months, for which one month conditionally, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFBB.
2. The decision starts after October 1, 2005.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Football Federation (Fédération Française de Football, FFF) charges respondent M26 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on November 6, 2004, respondent provided a sample for doping test purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of metabolites of cannabis and cocaine. Cannabis and cocaine are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
Whereas, by a decision of February 16, 2005, the disciplinary committee of the FFF has inflicted the respondent with a sanction of a one year period of ineligibility, from which three months conditionally.
This sanction was extended worldwide by the International Football Federation (FIFA) in its decision of 10 March 2005;

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of one year, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFF.
2. The sanction will end on February 17, 2006.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme, FFHMFAC) charges respondent M27 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on November 6, 2004, a sample was provided for doping test purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list. It is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent was sanctioned by the disciplinary committee of the FFHMFAC with a period of ineligibility of three months conditionally.
The respondent didn't provide any information about the reason for using cannabis.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 3 months, for which two months conditionally, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFHMFAC.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Cycling Federation (Fédération Française de Cyclisme, FFC) charges respondent M25 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a cycling event on August 26, 2004, respondent provided a sample for doping test purposes. Analysis of the samples showed the presence of a high testosterone on epitestosterone level. A complementary spectrometric analysis of the sample revealed an exogenous origin of testosterone. Exogenous testosterone is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent doesn't provide any explanation for the positive doping test.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of two years, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by approved French sport federations.
2. The decision will start after March 4, 2005.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Kanoe and Kayak Federation Federation (Française de Canoë-Kayak, FFCK) charges respondent M24 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a Kanoe-Kayak event on October 30, 2004, respondent provided a sample for doping test purposes. Analysis of the samples showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
Respondent was already sanctioned in first instant for a period of six months conditionally by the disciplinary committee of the FFCK.
The respondent had admitted the use of cannabis because of being in distress.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 6 months, from which 5 months conditionally, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFCK.
2. The decision will start on the date of notification.
3. The decision will not be published
4. The decision will be sent to the parties involved.