On 25 August 2015 the French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (FFHMFAC) Disciplinary Panel decided to impose a 3 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete after he tested positive for the prohibited substances Clenbuterol and Stanozolol. 

Thereupon the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) reopened the case against the Athlete. Following notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard.

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substances and claimed that was the victim of sabotage of his water bottle. Further he alleged that his rights had been violationed due to he was not notified about the postive test in July 2015.

The AFLD determines that:

• The Athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation;
• He failed to demonstrate with corroborating evidence that he was the victim of sabotage;
• He was duly notified about the positive test in July 2015;
• Oral ingestion of Stanozolol with water is immiscible;
• Use of both substances potentiate their enhancing effects.

Therefore the AFLD decides on 3 February 2016 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the notification, i.e. on 8 July 2015.

On 21 September 2015 the French Federation for Public Physical Education (UFOLEP) Disciplinary Panel decided to impose a warning on the cyclist after he tested positive for the prohibited substance Tuaminoheptane.

Hereafter the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) reopened the case against the Athlete. Following notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence.

The Athlete admitted the violation and denied the intentional use of the substance. He explained with evidence that he underwent medical treatment for his virus infection and that he had used Rhinofluimucil spray (Tuaminoheptane)  prescribed by his doctor.

The AFLD determines that:

• The Athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation;
• He underwent legitimate medical treatment for his condition;
• There was a medical justification for the prescribed substance;
• His use of the prescribed medication was consistent with the concentration found in his sample;

Therefore the AFLD decides on 3 February 2016 to annul the UFOLEP Decision and for the acquittal of the Athlete.

On 21 November 2015 the French Federation for Public Physical Education (UFOLEP) Appeal Panel decided to impose a 3 month period of ineligibility on the cyclist after he tested positive for the prohibited substance Betamethasone.

Hereafter the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) reopened the case against the Athlete. Following notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence.

The Athlete admitted the violation and denied the intentional use of the substance. He explained with evidence that he underwent medical treatment for his dental infenction and that he had used Célestène (Betamethasone) tablets prescribed by his dentist.

The AFLD determines that:

• The Athlete committed an anti-doping rule violation;
• He underwent legitimate medical treatment for his dental infection;
• There was a medical justification for the prescribed substance;
• He mentioned his medication on the Doping Control Form;
• His use of the prescribed medication was consistent with the concentration found in his sample;

Therefore the AFLD decides on 3 February 2016 to annul the UFOLEP Appeal Decision and for the acquittal of the Athlete.

In April and in May 2015 the French Athletics Federation (FFA) reported two anti-doping rule violations against the Athlete after his samples, collected in March and in April 2015, tested positive for the prohibited substance Roxadustat (FG-4592).

Hereafter on 28 May 2015 and on 1 July 2015 the FFA Disciplinary Panel decided to impose a fine and a total of 4 years on the Athlete. Thereupon the case was referred to French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) to consider further consequences. 

The AFLD determines that:

• The Athlete had committed two anti-doping rule violations;
• The Athlete had admitted the intentional use of the substance.

Therefore the AFLD decides on 3 February 2016:

• to uphold the FFA decision for the imposition a sanction of 4 years on the Athlete;
• to report the decision and extend the sanction to the National en International Sports Federations.

On 26 June 2015 the French Federation for Kick Boxing, Muay Thai and Associated Disciplines (FFKMDA) Disciplinary Panel decided to impose a 1 year period of ineligibility on the kickboxer after he tested positive for the prohibited substance Boldenone.

Thereupon the FFKMDA Appeal Panel failed to render timely a decision and the case was referred to French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD).

The Athlete denied the intentional use of the prohibited substance and requested for annulment of the case. He claimed that he was unaware that the supplements he had used to recover from an injury contained Boldenone.

Further the Athlete claimed that several irregularities had occurred during the Doping Control. He asserted that these failures would invalidate the entire sample collection.

The AFLD determines that:

• The Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation and the test results were undisputed;
• Following notification and sample collection the Athlete had signed the Doping Control Form;
• The sample collection was valid and the Doping Control Officer in question was competent;
• The Athlete acted with significant fault or negligence because he failed to check his supplements;
• He ignored his doctor's instructions and attempted to quicken his recovery.

Therefore the AFLD decides on 21 January 2016 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 26 May 2015.

On 3 October 2015 the French Squash Federation (FFSQ) Appeal Panel decided to impose a 1 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete after she tested positive for the prohibited substances Prednisolone and Prednisone.

Hereafter the case against the Athlete was reopened by the AFLD. Following notification the Athlete filed a statement in her defence.

The Athlete admitted the violation and denied the intentional use of the substances. She explained with medical documents that she had use Solupred (Prednisolone) as treatment for her pain.

The AFLD determines that:

• The Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation;
• She acted with significant fault or negligence because she failed to check her medication;
• She failed to demonstrate a medical justification, nor that the violation was not intentional.

Therefore the AFLD decides on 21 January 2016 to impose a 1 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the decision notification .

On 12 June 2015 the French Federation of Weightlifting, Fitness, Powerlifting and Bodybuilding (FFHMFAC) decided to impose a 4 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete after he tested positive for the prohibited substance Oxilofrine (Methylsynephrine).

Hereafter the case against the Athlete was reopened by the AFLD. Following notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence.

The Athlete admitted the violation, denied the intentional use of the substance and explained that the source was a supplement he had used. He acknowledged that he acted negligently as he had not checked this supplement before using.

The AFLD determines that:

• The Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation;
• He failed to check the ingredients on the label of this supplement;
• He did not mention the supplement on the Doping Control Form;
• He established how the substance had entered his system;
• He acted with siginificant fault or negligece.

Therefore the AFLD decides on 21 January 2016 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete, starting on the date of the provisional suspension, i.e. on 12 June 2015.

In February 2015 the Athlete tested positive for the prohibited substances Prednisolone and Prednisone. Thereupon the French Athletics Federation (FFA) failed to render timely a decision and the case was referred to French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD). Following notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence.

The Athlete acknowledged that at the material time he daily had used Prednisolone as treatment for his diagnosed condition. He mentioned this medication on the Doping Control Form and produced a medical certificate of his physician in Kenya.

The AFLD determines that:

• The Athlete had committed an anti-doping rule violation;
• The violation was not intentional;
• He failed to produce a prescription, nor documents regarding his diagnosed condition;
• He mentioned his medication on the Doping Control Form;
• He acted with No Significant Fault or Negligence.

Therefore the AFLD decides on 21 January 2016 to impose a 6 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete.

On 19 June 2015 the French Pétanque Bowls Federation (FFPJP) Disciplinary Panel decided to impose a 1 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete after he tested positive for the prohibited substances Methyltestosterone and Stanozolol.

Hereafter the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) reopened the case against the Athlete. Following notification the Athlete filed a statement in his defence and he was heard.

The Athlete admitted the violation and denied the intentional use of the substances. He explained without corroborating evidence that in the three week before the Doping Control he had used pills, provided by a friend, to improve his libido, .

The AFLD determines that:

• The presence of prohibited substances has been established in his sample and accordingly he committed an anti-doping rule violation; and
• The violations was not intentional although he acted negligently.

Therefore the AFLD decides on 21 January 2016 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.

On 3 October 2015 the French Squash Federation (FFSQ) Appeal Panel decided to impose a 1 month period of ineligibility on the Athlete after she tested positive for the prohibited substances Prednisolone and Prednisone.

Hereafter the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD) reopened the case against the Athlete. Following notification the Athlete filed a statement in her defence and she was heard.

The Athlete admitted the violation, denied the intentional use and acknowledged that she acted negligently. She explained with medical evidence that she had used the medication Solupred for her neck pain she suffered since 2014.

The AFLD determines that:

• The presence of a prohibited substance has been established in her sample and accordingly she committed an anti-doping rule violation;
• She acted negligently and failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional;
• She self-medicated and used the medication prescribed for her daughter;
• She failed to check this medication, nor mention this on the Doping Control Form;
• She already had received Codeine tablets from her doctor as painkillers.

Therefore the AFLD decides on 21 January 2016 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.