CAS 2011/A/2677 Dmitry Lapikov v. International Weightlifting Federation (IWF)
Related case:
IOC 2016 IOC vs Dmitry Lapikov
November 10, 2016
- Weightlifting
- Doping (methylhexanamine (dimethylpentylamine))
- Lex mitior
- Intent to enhance performance excluding any reduction of the period of ineligibility
- Lack of reduction of the sanction on the basis of proportionality
1. In application of the principle of the lex mitior, an athlete is to benefit from the amended version of the applicable anti-doping policy which is more favorable towards athletes and provides a two-year ineligibility period for a first offence instead of a four-year ineligibility.
2. According to Article 10.4 IWF Anti-Doping Policy (ADP) where an athlete can establish to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel how a specified substance entered his body and that such specified substance was not intended to enhance the athlete’s sport performance, the period of ineligibility of 2 years shall be reduced. In this respect, a professional athlete takes the risk of ingesting that specified substance when taking a food supplement and therefore to enhance his sport performance where a clear reference is indicated on the box to its performance-enhancing effect as well as to a substance similar to a prohibited substance included in the Prohibited List. The fact that numerous warnings on the risks associated with the intake of food supplements are given to athletes is also relevant. In other words, whether with full intent or per “dolus eventualis”, the athlete’s approach indicates an intent to enhance his athletic performance within the meaning of Art. 10.4. IWF ADP excluding any application of the reduction provided for under said article. For the same reasons, a reduction of the period of ineligibility on the basis of No Significant Fault or Negligence is not applicable.
3. Proportionality has focused on perceived fairness to the athlete based upon the pretence that the sanction imposed is deemed excessive or unfair on its face. Accordingly, CAS case law shows that an athlete has a high hurdle to overcome if he/she wants to prove the existence of such exceptional circumstances. Likewise the Swiss Federal Court held that the issue of proportionality would only be a legitimate issue if a CAS award constituted an infringement on individual rights that was extremely serious and completely disproportionate to the behaviour penalised. Where such exceptional circumstances have neither been asserted by the athlete, nor are they evident, a reduction of the otherwise applicable sanction on the basis of proportionality is not justified. Likewise, the risk that an important sports event such as the Olympic Games may accidentally fall within the period of a ban is inherent in the system and even constitutes a crucial element of this sanction. Therefore, a reduction solely based on the occurrence of an important sports event would undermine the whole system of doping sanctions.
In May 2011 the International Weightlifting Federation (IWF) has reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Russian Athlete Dmitry Lapikov after his sample tested positive for the prohibited substance Methylhexaneamine (1,3-dimethylamylamine). Consequently the IWF Doping Hearing Panel decided 23 November 2012 to impose a 4 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete.
Hereafter the Athlete appealed the IWF Decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The Athlete requested the Panel to set aside the Appealed Decision and to impose only a reprimand.
The Athlete denied the intentional use of the substance and asserted that the imposed sanction was disproportionate. Further he argued that he acted with No Significant Fault or Negligence.
Under the applicable Rules, and in the absence of any of the aggravating circumstances alleged by the IWF, the Panel finds that the Athlete’s period of ineligibility is not to exceed two years starting on 13 May 2011. Following assessment of the case the Panel deems that a 2 year period of ineligibility is appropriate and that there are no grounds for a further reduction of the sanction.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 10 July 2012:
1.) The appeal filed by Mr Dmitry Lapikov on 26 December 2011 against the decision dated 23 November 2011 rendered by the IWF Doping Hearing Panel is partially allowed.
2.) The decision rendered by the IWF Doping Hearing Panel on 23 November 2012 is partially reformed in the sense that Mr Dmitry Lapikov is ineligible to compete in weightlifting competitions for a period of two years starting from 13 May 2011.
3.) (…).
4.) (…).
5.) All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.
