Facts
The French Handball Federation (Fédération Française de Handball - FFHB) charges respondent M09 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a Men's Handball Championship regional, on Mai 6, 2012, a sample was taken for doping control purposes. The sample tested positive on a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and regarded as a specified substance.

History
The respondent did not comment or produce any document during the procedure to explain the presence of the substance detected in the sample of May 6, 2012.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 6 month in which the respondent can't participate in competition or sporting events organized by the FFHB.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced with the period of voluntary ineligibility.
3. The decision, dated August 11, 2011, of the disciplinary committee of the FFHB will be modified.
4. The decision starts on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

CAS 2012/A/2789 International Paralympic Committee(IPC) v. I., Venezuelan National Paralympic Committee (COPAVEN), Venezuelan National Anti-Doping Organization (VNADO) & Sport Federation for Visually Impaired Athletes in Venezuela (FEPOCIVE), award of 17 December 2012 (operative part of 28 August 2012)

Paralympic athletics
Doping (methenolone)
Responsibility of athletes for their choice of medical personnel and for advising medical personnel
Burden of proof by a “balance of probability” in order to rebut a presumption or establish specified facts
Violation of the athlete’s right to be timely informed of the anti-doping rule violation and CAS power of review
Equal treatment of totally blind athletes by the anti-doping organization representing the paralympic movement

1. WADA adduces the example of sabotage by a competitor despite due care of the athlete concerned as fulfilling the requirements of Article 10.5.1 WADC. On the other hand Article 10.5.2 might be applicable under particular circumstances in cases of administration of a prohibited substance by the athlete’s personal physician or trainer without disclosure to the athlete, because “Athletes are responsible for their choice of medical personnel and for advising medical personnel that they cannot be given any Prohibited Substance”. The same logic applies for sabotage of the athlete’s food or drink by a spouse, coach or another Person within the Athlete’s circle of associates, because “Athletes are responsible for what they ingest and for the conduct of those Persons to whom they entrust access to their food and drink”.

2. The Athlete has to observe established rules of evidence in proving No Fault or Negligence (Article 10.5.1) or No Significant Fault or Negligence (Article 10.5.2). When the burden of proof is upon the athlete to rebut a presumption or establish specified facts or circumstances, the standard of proof shall be by a “balance of probability”. The balance of probability standard is set forth by the WADC and by the CAS jurisprudence and means that the athlete alleged to have committed a doping violation bears the burden of persuading the judging body that the occurrence of a specified circumstance is more probable than its non-occurrence.

3. The violation of the athlete’s right to be informed in a fair and timely manner of the asserted anti-doping rule violation according to Article 8.1 WADC constitutes a procedural flaw. According to general CAS jurisprudence, the virtue of an appeal system which allows for a full rehearing before an appellate body is that any defects in the procedure before the body appealed from to CAS are cured by the procedure before CAS. The Panel must however first determine whether the athlete lost any chance to demonstrate how the prohibited substance entered the athlete’s body and that there was No Fault or Negligence or No Significant Fault or Negligence through the time that passed. Furthermore, such procedural flaw will be taken into account if it led to “delays not attributable to the athlete” in the understanding of Articles 10.9.1 WADC and IPC Anti-Doping Code respectively in order to determine the commencement of the period of ineligibility.

4. Even, if it has to be admitted that a totally blind athlete has not the same possibilities as an athlete without such impairment to protect against sabotage, such athlete is in totally the same position as all other totally blind athletes. Once an organization representing the paralympic movement, including the interests of all impaired athletes, has found reasonable and adequate to commit to the WADC and adopt an Anti-Doping Code which includes the same obligations for impaired athletes as for athletes without impairment, the measure for guaranteeing equality has shifted to a guarantee of equality between impaired athletes. All totally blind athletes have the same obligation, to be aware of possible sabotage and protect against by carefully selecting their entourage, in order to make sure that no prohibited substance can enter their body.

In August 2011 the Comisión Antidopaje de la República Bolivariana de Venezuela (CARBV), the Venezuelan National Anti-Doping Commission has reported an anti-doping violation against the blind parathlete after her sample tested positive for the prohibited substance metenolone.
After notification by the Federación Polideportiva de Ciegos de Venezuela (FEPOCIVE), the Venezuelan Blind Sports Federation, a provisional suspension was ordered and the Athlete filed a statement in her defence.

The Athlete argued in her statement, dated 24 October 2011, that her sport performance did not show any irregularities, that since she was already qualified for the 2012 London Paralympic Games it did not make any sense for her to take a prohibited substance and she could not have any intention to do so. Further to that she could not apply doping in-competition because she was all the time competing. A subsequent doping test in November 2011 did not show any Adverse Analytical Finding. All this together with the fact, that it would have been nonsense for her to risk her university studies and later career by losing the necessary financial support in case of doping, made her assume that she was a victim of sabotage.

The FEPOCIVE Honorary Council considered the circumstances in the case. The Athlete is total visual impaired and therefore depends of her support staff. Due to her visual impairment it is impossible for her to control for herself the things that anyone might give her.
On 3 November 2011 The Honorary Council decided to impose no other sanction on the Athlete than automatic disqualification of her results, medals, points and prizes.

In November 2011 the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) did not confirm the decision of the FEPOCIVE Honorary Council and did not permit the Athlete to compete, without a notification and a hearing, at the 2011 Parapan American Games. IPC urges Comité Paralímpico de Venezuela (COPAVEN), the Venezuelan Paralypic Committee, to investigate and discipline the responsible person(s).

Hereafter the FEPOCIVE Honorary Court decided to conduct further investigations as to the Athlete and her staff. FEPOCIVE notified the Athlete and ordered a provisional suspension for the second time.
In January 2012 the Athlete appealed the decision for a provisional suspension before the FEPOCIVE Honorary Court and requested to lift the provisional ban to resume her sport career.
On 14 March 2012 The FEPOCIVE Honorary Court decided to impose a 1 year period of ineligibility (reduced to 7 months), on the Athlete, starting on 15 August 2011.

On 2 May 2012 IPC appealed the decision of the FEPOCIVE Honorary Court of 14 March 2012 with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). However on 18 May the Athlete informed CAS that the FEPOCIVE Honorary Court had revoked its decision of 14 March and preplaced it by a 2 year period of ineligibility imposed on the Athlete.
In July 2012 CARBV, COPAVEN and FEPOCIVE informed CAS they wanted to discontinue the CAS proceedings, but IPC wanted to continue. A sole arbitrator ruled without a hearing on the basis of the written submissions.

In the opinion of the Sole Arbitrator the IPC failed to notify the Athlete of her suspension from the Paralympic Games and ordered the suspension without an investigation as a result of hearing.
CARBV, COPAVEN and FEPOCIVE violated the Athlete's right to be informed in a fair and timely manner of the anti-doping rule violation. However the Sole Arbitrator concludes that the violation of the Athlete’s right did not affect her possibility of establishing the necessary evidence, because all the time she was not aware of which evidence was needed to demonstrate the provisions to be applied. Also all totally blind athletes have the same obligation, to be aware of possible sabotage and protect against by carefully selecting their entourage, in order to make sure that not prohibited substance can enter their body.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport rules:
1.) The Appeal filed by the International Paralympic Committee is admissible.
2.) The decision rendered by the FEPOCIVE on 14 March 2012, in the matter of the athlete I., is set aside.
3.) I. is suspended from 21 August 2011 for a period of two years. The period of any provisional suspension served by I. shall be credited against the total period of ineligibility to be served.
4.) (…)
5.) (…)
6.) All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.

Facts
The French federation of Full Contact and associated sports (Fédération Française de Sports de Contact et Disciplines Associées, FFSCDA) charges respondent M08 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. Respondent didn't attend the doping control when notified during the French junior championship of Muaythai on March 27, 2011.

History
Because of a knee injury the respondent went to a hospital for a X-ray photo and didn't attend the doping control.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 2 years, in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestation organized by the FFSCDA and associated disciplines.
2. All the results obtained on the championship of Muaythai on March 27, 2011, are cancelled. Medals, points and price money are withdrawn.
3. The decision will start on the date of notification.
4. 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 M07 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a regional weightlifting championship, on April 16, 2011, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample tested positive on 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
Respondent did not comment or produce any document during the procedure to explain the presence of the substance detected in the sample.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 6 months in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized by the FFHMFAC.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period of voluntary suspension.
3. The decision, dated August 31, 2011, from the disciplinary committee of the FFHMFAC will be modified.
4. The decision will start on the date of notification.
5. The decision will be published en sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French federation of Full Contact and associated sports (Fédération Française de Sports de Contact et Disciplines Associées, FFSCDA) charges respondent M06 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During the French junior muaythai championship on March 27, 2011, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample tested positive on a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list and regarded as a specified substance.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 6 months, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized by the FFSCDA.
2. All results obtained at the championship in March 27, 2012, are cancelled. Medals, points and price money are withdrawn.
3. The decision will start on the day of notification.
4. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

In August 2013 USADA has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athletes Gregory Flood and Frank Petrucci after their samples tested positive for the prohibited substance glycerol.

The Athletes admitted the violation and stated they used a supplement Pure Glycerin USP. They researched the ingredients before using the supplement and without finding a prohibited substance on GlobalDRO, the official website of a number of National Anti-Doping Authorities.
USADA concludes that the Athletes used the supplement product, which contained the prohibited substance, without intention to enhance performance or to use as masking agent. After purchasing the supplement the Athletes researched the ingredients for prohibited substance on the GlobalDRO website as directed by USADA and, through no fault of their own, the information provided to the Athletes was incorrect.
Therefore, on 20 August 2013, USADA issued a news release stating that both Athletes accepted a sanction of a public warning and the loss of their results obtained on 7 August 2013.

Hereafter the International Federation of Rowing Associations (FISA) ordered a hearing to examine the circumstances of the cases.
Considering the Athlete’s statements and the documentary evidence, the FISA Doping Hearing Panel decides to confirm the USADA sanction.

Related case:
FISA 2015 FISA vs Kissya Cataldo Da Costa
August 7, 2015

In August 2012 the International Federation of Rowing Associations (FISA) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Kissya Cataldo Da Costa after her A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance recombinant human erythropoetin (rhEPO).
After notification a provisional suspension was ordered. The Athlete filed a statement in her defence and confirmed she did not attend the hearing of the FISA Doping Hearing Panel.

The Athlete stated she ingested the prohibited substance and implied that the positive test was due to a contaminated supplement. The Athlete argued that due to the prohibited substance was found in July 2012 during an out-of-competition period, and not in-competition, this minimizes the performance enhancing effect and impact as Athlete who competed one month later at the 2012 London Olympic Games.

The Panel concludes that the Athlete failed to provide sufficient evidence for her argument about the contaminated supplement and flawed about the out-of-competition testing.
Therefore the FISA Doping Hearing Panel decides to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. 3 August 2012.

In April 2011 the International Federation of Rowing Associations (FISA) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Moldovan Athlete Alexandr Tufaniuc after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance furosemide.
RUSADA notified the Athlete and ordered a provisional suspension. Hereafter the case was transferred to FISA due to the Athlete is a citizen of Moldova. In June 2011 the Moldovan national federation reported to FISA its decision to sanction the Athlete with a 1 year period of ineligibility. However FISA decided to retain results management authority of this case. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and was heard for the FISA Doping Hearing Panel.

The Athlete stated he used a herbal tea product as a purifying and weight loss supplement and claimed that this tea contained the furosemide.
The Panel concludes that the Athlete only suggested a way that the substance could have entered his body and without presenting evidence which established how the furosemide entered his body.
The FISA Doping Hearing Panel decides to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 9 April 2011.

In August 2009 the International Federation of Rowing Associations (FISA) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete Maksym Kontsevyy after his A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance testosterone with at a T/E ratio above the WADA threshold.
The Ukrainian Rowing Federation notified the Athlete on behalf of FISA and ordered a provisional suspension. The Athlete filed a statement in his defence and confirmed he did not attend the hearing of the FISA Doping Hearing Panel.

The Athlete stated that he had used sports drinks and vitamin complexes which contained the prohibited substance as part of a training programme at a sports facility. He claimed that he was told the programme was safe but that he did not ask what he was being given as he was accustomed to trusting people.
The FISA Doping Hearing Panel finds the Athlete’s explanation insufficient and decides to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 18 August 2009.

Facts
The French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (Fédération Française d'Halterophilie, Musculation, Force Athlétique et Culturisme, FFHMFAC) charges respondent M05 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. The respondent failed to report three times in "ADAMS" his whereabouts during the fourth quarter of 2010 the first , in the first quarter of 2011 to the last two.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of 9 months, in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized by the FFHMFAC.
2. The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the time allready served in voluntary suspension.
3. The decision, dated June 22, 2012, of the disciplinary committee of the FFHMFAC will be modified.
4. The decision will start on the date of the notification.
5. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.