The case involves a doping violation by wrestler Maria Stadnyk, who tested positive for the prohibited substance furosemide during the 2006 European Wrestling Championship. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) appealed a decision by the International Federation of Associated Wrestling Styles (FILA) to reduce Stadnyk's suspension from two years to 15 months. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) reviewed the case de novo and addressed key legal issues, including jurisdiction, procedural fairness, and the burden of proof on athletes to explain how prohibited substances enter their systems.
Initially, Stadnyk received a 23-month ban, but FILA's Appeal Commission reduced it to 15 months, allowing her to compete from July 2007. WADA contested this reduction, arguing it was unjustified and sought reinstatement of the original two-year suspension. The CAS panel examined whether the decision to reduce the sanction was made by FILA's Appeal Commission or its President, concluding it was the former, thus granting CAS jurisdiction under FILA's Anti-Doping Regulations.
Stadnyk claimed the substance entered her system without her knowledge, alleging a rival, Vera Tkhorovska, spiked her drink. However, the panel found inconsistencies and implausibilities in the testimonies of Stadnyk and Tkhorovska, undermining their credibility. Medical evidence also cast doubt on the sabotage claim, as the detected levels of furosemide were unlikely to result from ingestion 48 hours prior to testing. The panel ruled Stadnyk failed to prove "no significant fault or negligence," upholding the standard two-year suspension.
The panel also addressed procedural delays, ruling the suspension should be backdated to the sample collection date (26 April 2006) to account for delays not attributable to Stadnyk. This adjustment meant her suspension ended on 25 April 2008, but all competitive results during that period were disqualified, including medals and prizes. The CAS upheld WADA's appeal, overturning FILA's decision and reinforcing the importance of consistent anti-doping enforcement.
The case highlights the complexities of anti-doping regulations, emphasizing the strict liability principle and the challenges athletes face in proving lack of fault. It also underscores the role of WADA in ensuring uniform application of rules and the need for procedural fairness in disciplinary processes. The final ruling reaffirmed the two-year suspension and disqualification of Stadnyk's results, demonstrating the stringent consequences of doping violations.