In re: ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ANTI-DOPING RULE IN TERMS OF ARTICLE 2.1 OF THE 2009 ANTI-COPING RULES OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN

Similar documents
In re: ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ANTI-DOPING RULE IN TERMS OF ARTICLE 2.1 OF THE 2016 ANTI-DOPING TRIBUNAL FINDINGS AND SANCTION

IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN INSTITUTE FOR DRUG-FREE SPORT ANTI-DOPING DISCIPLINARY COMMITTE HELD AT HOLIDAY INN ROSEBANK RULING

SA INSTITUTE FOR DRUG FREE SPORT (SAIDS) ANTI DOPING DISCIPLINARY HEARING

SOUTH AFRICAN INSTITUTE FOR DRUG-FREE SPORT (SAIDS)

Decision. the FIBA Disciplinary Panel established in accordance with Article 8.1 of the FIBA Internal Regulations governing Anti-Doping in the matter

INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE IOC DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DECISION REGARDING IRYNA KULESHA BORN ON 26 JUNE 1986, BELARUS, ATHLETE, WEIGHTLIFTING

DECISION OF THE WORLD CURLING FEDERATION CASE PANEL. Dated 14 June, In respect of the following

CODE OF CONDUCT AND DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES

COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT (CAS) Anti-doping Division XXIII Olympic Winter Games in Pyeongchang

INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE IOC DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DECISION

Decision. the FIBA Disciplinary Panel established in accordance with Article 8.1 of the FIBA Internal Regulations governing Anti-Doping in the matter

Arbitration CAS anti-doping Division (OG Rio) AD 16/010 International Olympic Committee (IOC) v. Gabriel Sincraian, award of 8 December 2016

UWW ANTI-DOPING PANEL DECISION. Case

Arbitration CAS 2009/A/2011 Stephan Schumacher v. International Olympic Committee (IOC), award on costs of 6 May 2010

Arbitration CAS anti-doping Division (OG Rio) AD 16/004 International Olympic Committee (IOC) v. Silvia Danekova, award of 12 August 2016

IN THE MATTER OF PROCEEDINGS BROUGHT UNDER THE ANTI-DOPING RULES OF THE RUGBY FOOTBALL LEAGUE DECISION

INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE IOC DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DECISION REGARDING IRYNA KULESHA BORN ON 26 JUNE 1986, BELARUS, ATHLETE, WEIGHTLIFTING

Decision. the FIBA Disciplinary Panel established in accordance with Article 8.1 of the FIBA Internal Regulations governing Anti-Doping in the matter

Issued Decision UK Anti-Doping and Nigel Levine

Discipline Guidance for RFU Clubs

CRICKET DISCIPLINE COMMISSION REGULATIONS

SCOTTISH RUGBY GUIDE TO DISCIPLINARY ISSUES. Season

CODE OF CONDUCT. (Version: 1 January 2018)

Golf North Queensland Men s Open (2017) CONDITIONS OF PLAY

Disciplinary Procedures for Players in Scottish Women s Football Youth Leagues. Season 2018

SPECIAL GENERAL MEETING OF THE NEW SOUTH WALES ICE HOCKEY ASSOCIATION Inc. to be held at on Sunday 22 nd February 2004 at Blacktown Ice Arena

INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE IOC DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DECISION REGARDING ALMAS UTESHOV BORN ON 18 MAY 1988, KAZAKHSTAN, ATHLETE, WEIGHTLIFTING

Disciplinary Procedures For Players in Scottish Women s Football Youth Regional Leagues. Season 2016

BRIDPORT RUGBY FOOTBALL CLUB DISCIPLINE POLICY

INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE IOC DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DECISION

the FIBA Disciplinary Panel established in accordance with Article 8.1 of the FIBA Internal Regulations governing Anti-Doping in the matter

DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE FOOTBALL FEDERATION OF AUSTRALIA. Determination of 7 February 2013 in the following matter. Spitting at opposing player

ABRIDGED DECISION. Made by the FEI Tribunal on 28 March 2014

Arbitration CAS ad hoc Division (O.G. Nagano) 98/002 R. / International Olympic Committee (IOC), award of 12 February 1998

PARTIAL DECISION of the FEI TRIBUNAL. dated 2 February Event/ID: SEA Games-S Kuang Rawang (MAS)/2017_G-SE.AS_0002_S_S_01

ANTI-DOPING AWARD DELIVERED BY THE ANTI-DOPING HEARING PANEL OF FISA. Members: Jean-Christophe Rolland Tricia Smith. In the case

SOUTH AFRICAN RUGBY UNION - ANTI-DOPING REGULATIONS

ANTI-DOPING AWARD DELIVERED BY THE ANTI-DOPING HEARING PANEL OF FISA. Members: Jean-Christophe Rolland Tricia Smith. In the case

DECISION. of the. ISU Disciplinary Commission. In the matter of

NORTH WEST MEN S LEAGUE - COMPETITION RULES 2015

6. Officials should maintain a high level of personal hygiene and should maintain a professional appearance at all times.

DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE FOOTBALL FEDERATION OF AUSTRALIA. Item R2 of clause 6.2 of the Disciplinary Regulations (violent conduct)

Arbitration CAS anti-doping Division (OG Rio) AD 16/006 International Olympic Committee (IOC) v. Kleber Da Silva Ramos, award of 20 August 2016

INTERNATIONAL PARALYMPIC COMMITTEE (the Applicant) Versus. Mr. Piotr TRUSZKOWSKI (the Respondent)

English. wada-ama.org

CCES & Frans. Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES) Joe Frans Canadian Curling Association (CCA) & Government of Canada Doping Richard H.

Code of Conduct and Team Travel Policy 2016 Inland Empire Swimming Age Group Zones/All Star Team (Please keep pages 1, 2, 4, & 5)

No. 24 of Professional Boxing Control Board Act Certified on: / /20.

INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE IOC DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DECISION REGARDING VITA PALAMAR BORN ON 12 OCTOBER 1977, UKRAINE, ATHLETE, ATHLETICS

UWW ANTI-DOPING PANEL DECISION. Case

Svenska Cricketförbundet - Disciplinary Procedure

Discipline Procedure for Dunnington Cricket Club

NON-PERSONAL HEARING THE FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION. and. Mr MARTIN SKRTEL Liverpool FC T H E D E C I S I O N A N D R E A S O N S

ICC UMPIRES CODE OF CONDUCT

Arbitration CAS 2012/A/2986 World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) v. Riley Salmon & Fédération Internationale de Volleyball (FIVB), award of 30 May 2013

GIRL S RUGBY LEAGUE - COMPETITION RULES 2018

ALBERTA SOCCER CODE OF CONDUCT, SOCIAL MEDIA & SUPERVISION POLICY FOR PROVINCIAL TEAM AND EXCEL PROGRAMMING

YOUTH OLYMPIC GAMES 2018: ARCHERY

POLICY STATEMENT PROVISION OF PERMITS TO VETERINARIANS TO PROVIDE SERVICES IN THE NEW SOUTH WALES THOROUGHBRED RACING INDUSTRY

BOXING AUSTRALIA NOMINATION FOR SELECTION CRITERIA AUSTRALIAN BOXING TEAM FOR THE 2018 COMMONWEALTH GAMES

UK ANTI-DOPING LIMITED Anti-Doping Organisation. And IN THE MATTER OF PROCEEDINGS BROUGHT UNDER THE ANTI-DOPING RULES OF THE WELSH RUGBY UNION

INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE IOC DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DECISION REGARDING ADAM SEROCZYNSKI BORN ON 13 MARCH 1974, ATHLETE, POLAND, CANOE

INTERNATIONAL PARALYMPIC COMMITTEE (the Applicant) Versus. Mr. Yoldani SILVA PIMENTEL (the Respondent)

Australian Canoeing. Team Members Bylaw. Adopted by the Board 31 October Bylaw #19. Australian Canoeing PO Box 6805 Silverwater, NSW 2128

Arbitration CAS 98/218 H. / Fédération Internationale de Natation (FINA), award of 27 May 1999

WELLINGTON GOLF INCORPORATED (WGI)

DECISION of the FEI TRIBUNAL. dated 27 July Person Responsible/NF/ID: Maria Fernanda Villar/URU/

DISCIPLINE COMPLAINTS AND APPEALS PROCEDURES

Cranbrook Sports Club Cranbrook Rugby Football Club

INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE IOC DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DECISION

IN THE MATTER OF PROCEEDINGS BROUGHT UNDER THE ICC ANTI-CORRUPTION CODE. Between: THE INTERNATIONAL CRICKET COUNCIL. and MR IRFAN AHMED DECISION

ANTI-DOPING REGULATIONS

Anti-Doping Important Facts and Highlights from WADA s Athlete Guide. At-a-Glance

2016 AUSTRALIAN OLYMPIC TEAM WRESTLING AUSTRALIA INCORPORATED NOMINATION CRITERIA

INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE IOC DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DECISION

Disciplinary Policy and Procedures

1.1.1 Appeal Panel means the appeal panel appointed by the Union under the Disciplinary Rules;

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ATHLETICS FEDERATIONS

JUDICIAL AWARD DELIVERED BY THE FISA DOPING HEARING PANEL. sitting in the following composition. In the case of Kissya Cataldo Da Costa (BRA)

ATHLETE S GUIDE TO THE BEF NATIONAL EQUINE ANTI-DOPING AND CONTROLLED MEDICATION RULES

2016 AUSTRALIAN OLYMPIC TEAM

AWARD DELIVERED BY THE FISA DOPING HEARING PANEL Sitting in the following composition

NATIONAL PLAYER TRANSFER REGULATIONS

GREATER MANCHESTER CRICKET LEAGUE DISCIPLINARY REGULATIONS

AFL Coaches Code of Conduct

ANTI-DOPING ESSENTIALS

National Youth Team Selection - Australian Sport Climbing Youth Team

IN THE MATTER OF RUGBY FOOTBALL UNION DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS CONCERNING RULE 5.12 RUGBY FOOTBALL UNION DANNY LIGAIRI-BADHAM JUDGMENT

Arbitration CAS ad hoc Division (O.G. Sydney) 00/015 Mihaela Melinte / International Amateur Athletic Federation (IAAF), award of 29 September 2000

Player Name:... Address: Street Address:... Suburb:... State:... Postcode:... Contact Details: Home Phone:... Mobile:... Address:...

CODE OF CONDUCT 1. APPLICATION AND SCOPE BRINGING THE GAME INTO DISREPUTE LIABILITY FOR SUPPORTER AND SPECTATOR CONDUCT...

Panel: Mr Hans Nater (Switzerland); President; Mr Dirk-Reiner Martens (Germany); Mr Raj Parker (United Kingdom)

ON-FIELD DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES PART 1

DECISION of the FEI TRIBUNAL. dated 18 September 2015

Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the Olympic Winter Games PyeongChang 2018 (as of August 2017) 1

IAAF ADVISORY NOTE USE OF PERSONAL INFORMATION (ANTI-DOPING AND INTEGRITY PROGRAMMES)

INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE IOC DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DECISION

TABLE TENNIS AUSTRALIA LTD COMMONWEALTH GAMES TEAM NOMINATION CRITERIA

SUNSHINE & DISTRICT TABLE TENNIS ASSOCIATION BY - LAWS GENERAL. Association Colors and Uniform Non Executive Portfolios MATCH REGULATIONS

BCAC ANTI DOPING POLICY

Transcription:

IN THE DISCIPLINARY HEARING OF: SOUTH AFRICAN INSTITUTE FOR DRUG-FREE SPORT and ALPHONSO ADONIS In re: ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ANTI-DOPING RULE IN TERMS OF ARTICLE 2.1 OF THE 2009 ANTI-COPING RULES OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN INSTITUTE FOR DRUG-FREE SPORT ( SAIDS ) DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE FINDINGS AND SANCTION A. INTRODUCTION 1. On 2 November 2011, Mr Alphonso Adonis ( Adonis ) was served a written charge as follows: On 06 August 2011, you provided a urine sample (A2632235) during an in-competition test. Upon analysis, the South African Doping Control Laboratory at the University of Free State reported the presence of a prohibited substance in your urine sample. The substance identified was the Stimulant, methylhexaneamine.

2 Methylhexaneamine is categorised under Class S6. Stimulants, in specific (b): Specified Stimulants on the World Doping Code 2011 Prohibited List International Standard. Adonis was advised that a disciplinary hearing would be convened for Thursday, 24 November 2011 to hear the charges against him. He was also advised that he was entitled to be legally represented. 2. The disciplinary panel comprised: Adv N M Arendse SC, Chairperson; Mr Leon Fleischer, Sports Administrator representative; and Dr Jon Patricios. Dr Zaid Eshack observed the proceedings as a medical representative. 3. The Committee was made privy to correspondence entered into between Mr Fahmy Galant (the SAIDS Doping Control Manager) and Adonis dated 30 august 2011, and various other e-mails (marked F1 14 in the bundle). 4. The Committee wishes to indicate at the outset that in future it is not desirable to make members of the Committee privy to private correspondence entered into between an accused athlete, and SAIDS. The Committee is of the view that it should only be provided with a charge sheet, and that any other information (written or oral) furnished to it should either be by agreement between SAIDS and the athlete, or between SAIDS and/or his or her legal representative, or the code concerned.

3 5. Indeed, the Committee wishes to indicate that it is not desirable for SAIDS to enter into correspondence directly with an accused athlete other than to deal with purely formal issues such as for example service of the charge sheet, arrangements to be made for further or additional testing, or arrangements relating to the hearing of the matter. 6. The Committee also wishes to express a concern that it would appear that the code concerned, SA Weightlifting ( SAW ) had apparently washed their hands off the athlete who although he had tested positive, and had yet to be found to be charged and/or found guilty of violating the code. In our view, SAIDS must ensure as far as possible that all sporting codes assist athletes who test positive, alternatively, that SAIDS should ensure that those athletes who test positive are legally represented either at their own cost, or at the cost of the code concerned. The reason for this is obvious: more often than not, a positive test can ruin an athlete s career, and spell the end of any form of participation in the code concerned. Where an athlete does nothing else but participate in the sport concerned, it could also be ruinous for the athlete in that any form of income or future income is terminated as a result. This could ruin the athlete and/or his or her family.

4 B. THE HEARING 7. The hearing was duly convened on Thursday, 24 November 2011, and the athlete (Adonis) was represented by Dr Arnold Tam. SAIDS was represented by Dr Nick Kock who appeared as prosecutor. 8. The hearing was as far as possible conducted in an informal manner during which the panel members posed a number of questions to Dr Tam and the athlete, and Dr Kok was allowed to ask intervening questions, and to also make further representations on behalf of SAIDS. 9. The informality was made possible by the fact that the athlete and Dr Tam did not contest the outcome of the tests done on the A sample, and the subsequent B sample. 10. The Committee did however make certain observations which bear repeating: 10.1 The report on the A sample received from the University of Free State and the report on the B sample both appear to have been signed by the Director of the UFS Institute, Director P J Van der Merwe. There is no indication to the Committee whether or to what extent Van der Merwe played any active role in the analysis. There is no indication on the written report whether he played any role whatsoever.

5 10.2 There is also no indication on either report who the persons were who conducted the sample analysis, and what tests were conducted. 10.3 There is also no evidence before us on how these reports were compiled, and how they were conveyed to both SAIDS, and other interested parties, if any. In future, the panel expects that these matters will be dealt with on affidavit. 10.4 In this matter, it was common cause that the athlete was guilty of the alleged violation. The Committee is concerned that a high-profile case may well come before it in which there is active participation by legal representatives on both sides, and that in such a case, a guilty athlete may well be found guilty on some or other technicality. C. THE CHARGE 11. It is common cause that the athlete both personally and through his representative Dr Tam, accepted liability for both positive tests conducted on the sample received. 12. The container with the supplement that the athlete used and which is the source of the methylhexaneamine, with the name Berseker by Titan Labs was subsequently tested as it contained 1,3-Dimethylamylamine (geranium stem) which is in fact methylhexaneamine.

6 13. In view of the co-operation of the athlete, and the positive identification of the substance, the Committee is satisfied that the athlete is indeed guilty of violating Article 2.1 of the 2009 Anti-Doping Rule of the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) as particularised in the charge sheet served on Mr Alphonso Adonis on 2 November 2011. 14. Accordingly the Committee finds Alphonso Adonis guilty as charged on 2 November 2011. D. THE SANCTION 15. The Committee heard from Mr Adonis himself in relation to his personal circumstances, and his performances as an athlete. 16. The Committee accepts that the athlete ingested the banned stimulant without knowing that it was in violation of the SAIDS Anti-Doping Code. It would appear that he was simply acting on the advice of a person who recommended the supplement concerned. Of course, ignorance of the law is no defence, and as a high-performance athlete, Adonis should have and must have known that he should be more cautious and to first check that he would not fall foul of the SAIDS Anti-Doping Regulations. 17. In this regard, both Adonis and his representative Dr Tam accepted full responsibility.

7 18. Dr Nick Kock on behalf of SAIDS also accepted the explanation given to the panel by Adonis and his representative, and he expressed his appreciation at the candour and honesty shown by the athlete. 19. As a result of the suspension immediately imposed on the athlete on 30 August 2011, the athlete forfeited his opportunity to appear for his country at the Youth Commonwealth Games. This was a huge blow to him, and served as a lesson at any attempt to breach the rules of fair play would be visited with a severe sanction in future. 20. The Committee accepted a recommendation made by Dr Kock of a four (4) month suspension with effect from 30 August 2011 which would mean effectively that the suspension would run from 30 August 2011 and would end on 30 December 2011. Adonis and his representative Dr Tam accepted the recommendation. 21. In the circumstances, the panel also had no reason not to accept the recommendation, and accordingly the Committee s sanction is as follows: Having found the athlete, Mr Alphonso Adonis, guilty of Anti-Doping Rule violation in terms of Article 2.1 of the 2009 Anti-Doping Rules of the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) as particularised in the charge sheet of 2 November 2011, the athlete is hereby given a sentence of a 4-month suspension with effect from

8 30 August 2011 which will mean that he is free to participate as an athlete with effect from 1 January 2012. DATED at CAPE TOWN and JOHANNESBURG this 15 th day of DECEMBER 2011. NORMAN ARENDSE SC MR LEON FLEISCHER E-MAIL: leonf@sascoc.co.za DR JON PATRICIOS E-MAIL: jpat@mweb.co.za