Related cases:
IBSF 2017 IBSF vs Maxim Belugin - Settlement
March 15, 2019
IOC 2017 IOC vs Maxim Belugin - Operative Part
December 22, 2017
Two reports commissioned by WADA, published by Prof Richard McLaren on 18.07.2016 and 09.12.2016, showed detailed evidences of organised manipulation of some Russian samples collected during the Olympic Winter Games Sochi 2014. The reports describe how urine bottles were opened and urine was switched with clean modified urine coming from a “biobank”, and how urine density had to be adjusted to match that recorded on the doping control form (if different at the time of collection) by adding salt to the sample.
As a result of the McLaren Reports the IOC Oswald Commission started investigations in order to establish the possible liability of individual athletes and to issue any sanctions so that decisions could be taken as far in advance of the 2018 Winter Games as possible. In the context of this Commission the IOC decided that all the samples of all Russian athletes who participated in Sochi were re-analysed. The re-analysis establish whether there was doping or whether the samples themselves were manipulated.
Maxim Belugin is a Russian Athlete competing in the Men's Bobsleigh Events at the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games.
In April 2017 the IOC Disciplinary Commission has reported multiple anti-doping rule violations against the Athlete for tampering, conspiracy and for testing positive for the prohibited substances Metenolone and Trenbolone.
The IOC conducted further investigations after opening of the proceedings against the Athlete and provided a dossier of evidence specific to the case:
- The forensic reports issued by experts in connection with scratches and marks examinations.
- The forensic reports issued by experts in connection with the salt content analysis.
- DNA analysis reports of the Athlete’s samples.
- Affidavits provided by Professor McLaren and Dr Rodchenkov.
The Athlete and his expert witnesses filed a statement with arguments and evidence in his defence and the Athlete was heard for the IOC Disciplinary Commission. The Athlete disputed the proceedings, the filed evidence, the admissibility and the affidavits in this case.
The Disciplinary Commission finds that the Athlete and his expert witnesses did not provide any explanation in respect of the presence of the prohibited samples in his samples. The Commission observes that the Athlete had enough time to address the analytical results. The fact that he did not produce any explanation in this respect is in itself significant and an indication that the Athlete has effectively no valid argument to challenge them.
The Panel rules that given the circumstances and the nature of the Prohibited Substances (anabolic steroids components of the Duchess cocktail), the only possible inference is that the presence of the Prohibited Substances is explained by the fact that the Athlete did use them for doping purposes.
In this matter the Lausanne Laboratory used methods and equipment capable of detecting prohibited substances at much lower levels than the Moscow and/or Sochi Laboratory. This explains why the Prohibited Substance may not have been detected in the analysis performed in Sochi. This also explains why the urine in question may have been considered as "clean urine" used for swapping if it had been tested for the purpose of preparing urine for the "clean urine bank".
The re-analysis of the Athlete’s A and B samples in the Lausanne Laboratory established the presence of the substances Metenolone and Trenbolone. Also forensic examination of the Athlete’s BEREG-KIT bottles showed that the B-sample bottle bear marks indicative of potential surreptitious opening.
Dr Rodchenkov testified that the third component of the Duchess cocktail (Oxandrolone) was not detected. Rodchenkov explained that the steroids in the Duchess Cocktail during wash-out elute in the following order: first, epioxandrolone (Oxandrolone); second epitrenbolone (Trenbolone); and finally the Metenolone metabolite disappeared, which was detectable longer than other steroids.
The Disciplinary Commission finds - based on the investigations, the evidence and findings - that the participation of the Athlete in the doping scheme is established to its comfortable satisfaction. The Disciplinary Commission concludes that it is more than comfortably satisfied that the Athlete committed the anti-doping rule violations and he was a participant in, and a beneficiary of, the cover up scheme implemented on the occasion of the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games.
Therefore the IOC Disciplinary Commission decides on 21 March 2018 that the Athlete Maxim Belugin:
1.) is found to have committed anti-doping rule violations pursuant to Article 2 of The International Olympic Committee Anti-Doping Rules applicable to the XXII Olympic Winter Games in Sochi, in 2014;
2.) is disqualified from the events in which he participated upon the occasion of the XXII Olympic Winter Games in Sochi, in 2014, namely:
- (i) the Two-Man's Bobsleigh Event, in which he ranked 4th or which he was awarded a diploma;
- (ii) the Four-Man's Bobslelgh Event, in which he ranked 4th for which he was awarded a diploma;
3.) has the diplomas obtained in the above-mentioned events withdrawn and is ordered to return the same to the International Olympic Committee.
4.) The Russian Team is disqualified from the Two-Man's Bobsleigh Event. The corresponding diplomas are withdrawn and shall be returned to the International Olympic Committee.
5.) The Russian Team is disquallfied from the Four-Man's Bobsleigh Event. The corresponding diplomas are withdrawn and shall be returned to the International Olympic Committee.
6.) The lntemational Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federation is requested to modify the results of the above-mentioned events accordingly and to consider any further action within its own competence.
7. Maxim Belugin is declared ineligible to be accredited in any capacity for all editions of the Games of the Olympiad and the Olympic Winter Games subsequent to the Sochi Olympic Winter Games.
8.) The Russian Olympic Committee shall ensure full implementation of this decision.
