CAS 2017/A/5124 Tatyana Chernova v. International Olympic Committee (IOC)
Related cases:
- CAS 2016_O_4469 IAAF vs ARAF & Tatyana Chernova
November 29, 2016 - CAS 2017_A_4949 Tatyana Chernova vs IAAF
July 18, 2017 - IOC 2016 IOC vs Tatiana Chernova
April 19, 2017
- Athletics (heptathlon)
- Doping in the context of a “Re-test procedure” (turinabol)
- Establishment of an ADRV based on the laboratory analysis of the athlete’s B sample
- Lack of proof allowing the rebuttal of the presumption regarding the validity of the laboratory analysis
1. Where the B1-Sample analysis is found to have satisfied the applicable International Standards for Laboratory (ISL), and where there has been no challenge to the validity of the B2-Sample analysis, with both the B1- and the B2-Samples sufficiently indicating the presence of a Prohibited Substance (turinabol), in satisfaction of the applicable ISL, an anti-doping rule violation (ADRV) is established. It is to be noted in this respect that the mere presence of a Prohibited Substance, irrespective of quantity, establish an ADRV. The finding of an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) can therefore be confirmed based on the laboratory analysis of the athlete’s B-Samples.
2. Where the athlete does not meet his or her burden to rebut the presumption according to which the WADA accredited laboratory is presumed to have conducted the analysis in accordance with the ISL and other applicable technical documents, the finding of an ADRV can be based on the validity of the laboratory analysis of the athlete’s samples. Furthermore, a valid analysis is sufficient to support the finding of an ADRV.
Ms Tatyana Chernova is a Russian Athlete competing in the Women’s heptathlon event at the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games.
In 2016, the International Olympic Committee decided to perform further analyses on certain samples collected during the 2008 Olympic Games. These additional analyses were performed with analytical methods which were not available in 2008. As a result in July 2016 the IOC reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Athlete after her 2008 A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance dehydrochlormethyltestosterone (turinabol).
The IOC Disciplinary Commission concluded that the Athlete has committed an anti-doping rule violation consistent with the intentional use of a prohibited substance specifically ingested to deliberately improve performance. Therefore on 19 April 2017 the IOC Disciplinary Commission decided to disqualify the Athlete from the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games including withdrawal and return of her bronze medal, the medallist pin and the diploma obtained in the Women’s heptathlon event.
Hereafter in May 2017 the Athlete appealed the IOC decision with the Court of Arbitrtion for Sport (CAS) and requested the Panel to set aside the IOC decision of 19 April 2017.
The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and disputed the reliability of the Lausanne Laboratory test results. The Athlete acknowledged that she tested positive in 2009 but contended that the results are not an admission of use in 2008. She asserted that the IOC Disciplinary Commission unfairly questioned the credibility of her expert witness.
Considering the evidence in this case the Panel concludes that the Athlete failed to rebut the presumption that a departure of the ISL occurred which could reasonably have caused the positive test result. Further the Panel finds that the differences between the B1 and B2 sample fall within the prescribed levels.
Because the Panel agrees that the laboratory analysis of the Athlete’s samples was valid and sufficient to support the finding of an anti-doping rule violation, the other evidence considered by the Commission is irrelevant to its conclusion that an anti-doping rule violation was established under both Article 2.1 and Article 2.2, and the Panel thus need not opine on whether such evidence was properly considered or interpreted.
Finally, considering the Athlete’s appeal does not raise an issue with regard to the sanction if the Decision as to her anti-doping rule violation is upheld, the consequences resulting from that anti-doping rule violation, as found by the Commission, including disqualification and forfeiture of medals are also upheld.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 4 December 2017 that:
1.) The appeal filed on 9 May 2017 by Ms. Tatyana Chernova against the decision of the International Olympic Committee Disciplinary Commission dated 19 April 2017 is dismissed.
2.) The decision rendered by the International Olympic Committee Disciplinary Commission on 19 April 2017 is upheld.
3.) (…).
4.) (…).
5.) All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.
