CAPR 2008 WADA vs CAPR & Efrain Ortiz

18 Apr 2008

In April 2007 the Comisión Antidopaje de Puerto Rico (CAPR), the Anti-Doping Commission of Puerto Rico, has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Parathlete Efrain Ortiz after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance stanozolol.
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete was heard for CAPR Anti-Doping Panel.

The Athlete stated that, after investigation, one of his supplements he used contained the prohibited substance. The Athlete’s medication and supplements were provided to him by his wife and purchased in the Dominican Republic. Considering the exceptional circumstances in this case and without intention to enhance sport performance, the CAPR Anti-Doping Panel decided on 7 June 2007 not to sanction the Athlete.

Hereafter WADA appealed the Anti-Doping Panel decision of 7 June 2007 with the CAPR Appeal Commission. WADA requested to set aside the Panel decision and argued there were no grounds to impose a less severe sanction on the Athlete.

The Appeal Commission concludes that the Athlete acted negligently due to he failed to research the ingredients of his medication and supplements before using.
Therefore the CAPR Appeal Commission decides to set aside the Anti-Doping Panel decision of 7 June 2007 and to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the notification, i.e. on 3 April 2007.

AFLD 2011 FFC vs Respondent M59

16 Jun 2011

Facts
The French Cycling Federation (Fédération Française de Cyclisme, FFC) charges respondent M59 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a cycling event on August 26, 2010, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample tested positive on betamethasone, a metabolite of methylphenidate (ritalinic acid) and ephedrine. The substances are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency prohibited list. Methylphenidate and ephedrine are regarded as specified substances.

History
The respondent explains that ha had used methylphenidate and ephedrine to regain his sporting level and to lose weight. The bethamethasone was used to treat a pain in his knee, for this he has a medical certificate. There was no intention to improve sport performance.

Decision
1. The sanction in a period of ineligibility of one year in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFC as pronounced in the decision, dated December 16, 2010, of the disciplinary committee of the FFC but extended to all French sport federations.
2. The decision will start on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2011 FFM vs Respondent M58

16 Jun 2011

Facts
The French Motorycling Federation (Fédération Française de motocyclisme, FFM) charges respondent M58 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a motorcycling event on August 22, 2010, a sample was taken for doping control purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of a metabolite of tetrahydrocannabinol, the active ingredient of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent had used cannabis during a festivity, it was used occasionally. There was no intention to enhance sport performances. However the use of cannabis in motor sports creates a dangerous situation for the driver and the crowd.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 9 months in which in the respondent can't take part in competitions and manifestations organized or authorized by the FFM.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced with the period already served in by the decision (three months period of ineligibility), dated December 3, 2010, of the disciplinary committee of the FFM.
3. The decision, dated December 3, 2010, of the disciplinary committee of the FFM will be modified.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2011 FFB vs Respondent M57

16 Jun 2011

Facts
The French Federation of Billiards (Fédération Française de Billard, FFB) charges respondent M57 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a three cushions billiards tournament on June 11, 2010, a sample for a doping test was taken. The sample tested positive for hydrochlorothiazide which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent had used medication to treat high blood pressure. He has a medical certificate. Regarding his age there was no reason for him to use doping.

Decision
1. The decision (a warning) dated November 6, 2010, of the disciplinary committee of the FFB will not be modified.
2. All results obtained at the match of June 11, 2010, will be cancelled. Medals, points and prizes will be withdrawn.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2011 FFF vs Respondent M56

16 Jun 2011

Facts
The French Football Federation (Fédération Française de Football, FFF) charges respondent M56 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on March 21, 2010, a sample was taken for doping control purposes. The analysis showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent didn't provide any information about how the prohibited substance had entered his body. On february 24, 2009, he had received also a sanction for the use of cannabis (period of ineligibility of 2 years).

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of two years in which respondent can't take part in competitions and sporting events organized or authorized by the FFF.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served by the earlier decision (period of ineligibility of one year), dated December 16, 2010, from the disciplinary committee of the FFF.
3. The earlier decision dated December 16, 2010, of the disciplinary committee of the FFF will be modified.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2011 FFHMFAC vs Respondent M55

16 Jun 2011

Facts
The French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme, FFHMFAC) charges respondent M55 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a weightlifting event on June 19, 2010, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of methylhexaneamine, boldenone or its metabolites and metandienone or its metabolites, they are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent admits to use of product for fast recovery three days before the weightlifting event.The amount and nature of the supplements he used will count for the sanction.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility for four years in which respondent can't take part in competitions and sport events organized or authorized by the FFHMFAC as pronounced by the disciplinary committee of the FFHMFAC but extended to all relevant French sport federations.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

CONI 2010_80 CONI vs Alessandro Colò

8 Oct 2010

The Ufficio di Procura Antidoping (UPA), the CONI Anti-Doping Prosecution Office has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Allessandro Colò after his A and B samples, provided in Mexico on 25 April 2010, tested positive for the prohibited substance clenbuterol. After notification a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete was heard by the UPA.

The Athlete stated that the positive test was the result of the contamination of meat he had consumed in the hotel in Mexico due to the illegal use of clenbuterol on Mexican farms. The Athlete argued that he took every precaution to avoid problems related to food during the competition in Mexico. Therefore he choose to stay in a higher level hotel in Mexico to avoid problems with hygiene en contamination, including food.

Considering the circumstances the CONI National Anti-Doping Tribunal concludes that the Athlete has no significant fault or negligence in this case and decides to impose a 1 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on 25 May 2010.

AFLD 2011 FFF vs Respondent M53

26 May 2011

Facts
The French Football Federation (Fédération Française de Football, FFF) charges respondent M53 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on March 21, 2010, a sample was taken for doping control purposes. The analysis showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent didn't provide any information about how the prohibited substance had entered his body.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of six months in which respondent can't take part in competitions and sporting events organized or authorized by the FFF.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served by the earlier decision (1 months of ineligibility), dated June 30, 2010, from the disciplinary committee of the FFF.
3. The earlier decision dated June 30, 2010, of the disciplinary committee of the FFF will be modified.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2011 FFPJP vs Respondent M52

26 May 2011

Facts
The French Pétanque Federation (Fédération Française de pétanque et jeu provençal, FFPJP)) charges respondent M52 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on June 12, 2010, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of hydrochlorothiazide. Hydrochlorothiazide is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and it is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent used medication to treat high blood pressure. This medication was the cause of the positive doping test. Medical statements to prove this condition are provided.

Decision
1. The respondent is acquitted.
2. The decision will start on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

AFLD 2011 FFSCDA vs Respondent M50

26 May 2011

Facts
The French Federation for Contact Sport and Associated Disciplines (Fédération Française de Sports de Contact et Disciplines Associées, FFSCDA) charges respondent M50 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a muaythai event on April 3, 2010, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis showed the presence of a metabolites of stanozolol, metabolites of metandienone and trenbolone. Al these substances are prohibited substances according the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
Respondent didn't give any explanation for the positive result of the doping test. The number and the nature of the prohibited substances are taken into account to determine the sanction.

Decision
1. The sanction is a four years period of ineligibility in which respondent can't take part in competition or sport manifestations organized or authorized by the FFSCDA or related federations.
2. The decision (peridod of ineligibility of six months) of September 7, 2010, of the disciplinary committee of the FFSCDA will be modified.
3. The period of ineligibility will be reduced with the period already served by the decision of September 7, 2010.
4. The results obtained at the event on April 4, 2010, will be cancelled. Medals, points and prizes will be withdrawn.
5. The decision starts on the date of notification.
6. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

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