THE SUBJECT OF THE DISPUTE:
In 2019, the International Testing Agency (ITA), acting on behalf of FINA, carried out an out-of-competition doping test on a Ukrainian athlete. The samples were sent to a WADA-accredited laboratory, which reported an adverse analytical finding (AAF).
Furosemide — a substance in class S.5 (diuretics and masking agents), prohibited for use at any time — was detected in the sample. The presence of this substance automatically constitutes a breach of anti-doping rules under the principle of ‘strict liability’ for the athlete.
Despite the absence of evidence of doping to enhance sporting performance, the application of the standard sanctions would have entailed a possible suspension of up to four years, which would effectively have meant the interruption or end of his sporting career.
Important:
To reduce the length of the suspension, the athlete must establish and substantiate the reason for the positive test result. If this is not done, the standard sanction applies, as in the absence of an explanation it is assumed that the violation was not unintentional.
Firstly, it is necessary to determine what the prohibited substance was contained in: tablets, a dietary supplement, a drink, etc. Ideally, the athlete should still have the packaging, the receipt and any remaining product.
Next, the athlete must explain why they consumed the product containing the prohibited substance. This depends entirely on the specific circumstances.
WHAT HAS BEEN DONE:
A sports lawyer at YURIS FERRUM LLP developed a legal strategy taking into account the principle of strict liability for athletes and the possibilities for reducing the sanction in accordance with anti-doping rules.
Our task was to prove the absence of intent in committing the breach and to minimise the consequences for the athlete’s career.
To do this, we:
- carefully analysed the FINA Anti-Doping Rules, the provisions of the WADA Code and international practice in cases involving furosemide;
- we gathered medical documentation and demonstrated that the substance had entered the athlete’s system unintentionally during treatment;
- we established communication with the anti-doping authorities and initiated a voluntary suspension as a procedural step to reduce the duration of the sanction.
OUR ARGUMENTS:
- her young age and lack of experience. We demonstrated that the athlete was at the start of her professional career, and that her limited experience of competing in international events may have contributed to the procedural errors made during the doping control process.
- Completion of the doping control form.The form did not list the medication received at the hospital the day before the test, although the athlete did list other supplements and vitamins. This confirmed the absence of any intention to conceal information and indicated a technical error rather than wilful misconduct.
- Route of administration. Furosemide was part of a medicinal product administered during emergency treatment. The prescription was justified and was not intended to enhance sporting performance.
RESULT:
The suspension period was reduced from four years to four months. As a result, we were able to safeguard the client’s sporting career and minimise the damage to her reputation.
Once the suspension period had ended, the athlete returned to training and resumed competing.
The project was handled by sports law solicitors from YURIS FERRUM Law Firm: Hanna Hnizdovska and her secretary, Lyudmyla Gnatenko.