Facts
The French Football Federation (Fédération Française de Football, FFF) charges respondent M63 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During football match on November 11, 2011, a sample was taken for doping control. 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. Cannabis is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent was a minor at the moment of doping control, by written submission he admits the doping violation.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 6 months in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFF.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the earlier decision (2 months period of ineligibility) dated January 30, 2012, of the disciplinary committee of the FFF.
3. The earlier decision (2 months period of ineligibility) dated January 30, 2012, of the disciplinary committee of the FFF will be modified.
4. The decision will start on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
French Wrestling Federation (Fédération Française de Lutte, FFL) charges respondent M61 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on November 19, 2011, a sample was taken for doping test 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 prohibited list and is regarded as a specified substance.

History
In written submissions and at the hearing before the disciplinary committee respondent admitted to have used cannabis in the last quarter of the year 2011 , he denies wanting to improve his athletic performance , stating that he used because his sports results did not respond to their expectation. Because of the isolation that followed he started using cannabis.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 6 months in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized by the FFL.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served by the sanction of the decision (3 months period of ineligibility) dated February 24, 2012, of the disciplinary committee of the FFL.
3. The decision (3 months period of ineligibility) dated February 24, 2012, of the disciplinary committee of the FFL will be modified.
4. The decision will start on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Athletics Federation (Fédération française d'athlétisme, FFA) charges respondent M59 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on December 10, 2011, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of prednisolone and prednisone which are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent used medication against sinusitis as precaution not to infect her child who went through surgery. The respondent did mention during the control and provided medical statements for the use.

Decision
1. The earlier decision (1 month of ineligibility) dated March 8, 2012, of the disciplinary committee of the FFA will no be modified.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Related case:
CAS 2008/A/1565 WADA vs Frederico Turrini & CISM
August 4, 2008

The Athlete Federico Turrini participated in the 2007 Military World Games held in Hyderabad, India, which took place between 14 and 21 October 2007.
The Athlete was subject to an in-competition test on 19 October 2007 after his victory in the swimming race of 400 meter individual medley. He tested positive to 19-norandrosterone at a concentration higher than the threshold limit of 2 ng/ml and he did not request the analysis of the B-sample.
In a decision dated 15 January 2008, CISM Discipline Commission refrained to pronounce any sanction against the Athlete except for the cancellation of the results he obtained in the 2007 Military World Games.

Hereafter the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) appealed the CISM decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). On 4 August 2008 CAS ruled that the WADA appeal was upheld and decided to impose a 2 year ban, starting on the date of the notification, i.e. on 3 December 2007.

The Athlete appealed the CAS decision with the Swiss Federal Court, but this Court decides on 8 July 2009 to dismiss his appeal.

Facts
The French Athletics Federation (Fédération Française d'Athlétisme, FFA) charges respondent M58 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on November 11, 2011, a sample was taken for doping control purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of hydrochlorothiazide which is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent claims the that the cause of the positive test is a medicine he used to high-blood pressure. The respondent provides medical files with the proof of this condition.

Decision
1. The respondent is acquitted.
2. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Football Federation (Fédération Française de Football, FFF) charges respondent M57 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on September 16, 2011, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis above the threshold value. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent had not intention to improve his sport performance by using cannabis. Regarding the amount of cannabis measured he thinks a 3 months period of ineligibility is out of proportion.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of six months in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFF.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already served under the sanction against him of January 30, 2012 by disciplinary committee of the FFF and March 6, 2012, by appeal commission of the FFF.
3. The decision dated March 6, 2012, of the appeal commission (3 months of ineligibility) 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.

Related case:
CAS 2007/A/1399 WADA vs FILA & Maria Stadnyk
July 17, 2008

On 31 May 2006 the International Federation of Associated Wrestling Styles (FILA) decided to impose a 1 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete Maria Stadnyk after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance furosemide. After objection by WADA FILA decided on 4 September 2006 to increase the sanction and to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, instead of 1 year.

In November 2006 the Ukraine Wrestling Federation reported to FILA that investigation in this case showed that in April 2006 a rival Athlete Vira Tkhorovska had spiked the drink of the Athlete with the prohibited substance. As a result of this violation a lifetime ban was imposed on the rival Athlete Viro Tkhorovska.

Considering this new development in the case the FILA Presidents decided on 20 June 2007 to reduce the Athlete’s sanction to 15 months and declared the Athlete eligible from 26 July 2007.
Hereafter WADA appealed the FILA decision of 20 June 2007 with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and requested to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.
On 17 July 2008 The Court of Arbitration for Sport ruled that the WADA appeal is upheld and decided to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on 26 April 2006 up to and including 26 July 2007.

In November 2008 the Athlete appealed the CAS decision of 17 July 2008 with the Swiss Federal Court.
The Athlete requested to set aside the CAS decision and argued that the CAS has no jurisdiction to annul the decisions made by the FILA presidents.

On 17 March 2009 the Swiss Federal Court rules that CAS has jurisdiction and therefore decides to dismiss the appeal of the Athlete.

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 September 17, 2011, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of morphine and a metabolite of cannabis above the threshold value. Morphine and cannabis are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and are regarded as specified substances.

History
The respondent used a medicine which contained codeine, codeine metabolizes into morphine. Codeine is not a prohibited substance. For the use of cannabis the respondent didn't provide any explanation.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 6 months in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFF.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period of voluntary suspension.
3. The decision (2 months of ineligibility) dated January 30, 2012, of the disciplinary committee of the FFF will be modified.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Basketball Federation (Fédération Française de Basket-Ball, FFBB) charges respondent M55 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on October 9, 2011, a sample was taken for doping test 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). Cannabis is regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent admits the use of the cannabis but claims that there was no intention to enhance his sport performance.

Decision
1. The decision (2 months of ineligibility) dated January 25, 2012, of the disciplinary committee of the FFBB is cancelled because of incompetence.
2. 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 FFBB.
3. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period allready served under the decision of January 25, 2012.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

In December 2012 the National Anti-Doping Commission of Malta has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Lee Ross after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Cannabis.
After notification the Athlete was provisional suspended and heard for the National Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of Malta.

The Athlete admitted he had smoked cannabis the day before the doping test and stated he did not know it is a prohibited substance which in his opinion does not enhance sport performance.
Also the Malta Basketball Association had not started yet sessions to educate member clubs and Athletes about anti-doping regulations.

Without intention to enhance his sport performance the National Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel of Malta decides to impose a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 20 December 2012.