The case revolves around Holger Hetzel, a German equestrian rider, who was sanctioned by the Fédération Equestre Internationale (FEI) after his horse, Oreade de Fontin, tested positive for Gabapentin, a prohibited substance, during an event in Switzerland in June 2005. Gabapentin, an anti-epileptic drug for humans, was administered by Hetzel five days before the event to treat what was diagnosed as epileptiform seizures in the horse. Hetzel claimed the treatment was necessary due to a therapeutic emergency, as other therapies had failed, and argued he was unaware of the drug’s prohibited status. The FEI contested this defense, stating Gabapentin is not approved for equine use and poses significant risks to the horse, rider, and public. The FEI also highlighted Hetzel’s failure to seek authorization from the Veterinary Commission, a violation of anti-doping rules. Expert witnesses supported the FEI’s position, noting the rarity of epileptiform seizures in horses and the inappropriateness of Gabapentin for such treatment.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruled against Hetzel, concluding the use of Gabapentin was a deliberate violation of FEI regulations. The panel found Hetzel, as a professional, should have recognized the drug’s potential performance-enhancing effects and the risks involved. The absence of prior authorization and the unapproved nature of the treatment reinforced the violation. The CAS upheld the FEI’s sanctions, including disqualification of the horse, forfeiture of prize money, a five-month suspension, and a fine of CHF 1,000. Hetzel appealed, arguing the sanctions were disproportionate and that Gabapentin was not explicitly prohibited at the time. The FEI countered that Gabapentin fell under the general definition of banned substances due to its effects on the central nervous system, and stakeholders had been warned about its use. The CAS affirmed the FEI’s decision, emphasizing the strict liability of riders for prohibited substances in their horses and the importance of adhering to anti-doping regulations.
The case underscores the strict enforcement of doping rules in equestrian sports and the expectation that professionals exercise due diligence in medication practices. The panel highlighted the need for transparency and proper authorization when treating competition horses, stressing the welfare of the animal and the integrity of the sport. Hetzel’s lack of prior violations and cooperation were considered but deemed insufficient to overturn the sanctions. The ruling reaffirmed the proportionality of the penalties, given the deliberate nature of the violation and the potential risks posed by the unapproved substance. The decision serves as a reminder of the consequences of non-compliance with FEI regulations and the importance of consulting authorities before administering any treatment to competition horses.