The case centers on an appeal by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) against a decision by the Italian National Olympic Committee (CONI) concerning Italian table tennis player Valentino Piacentini, who tested positive for cocaine metabolites during the Italian National Championship in June 2007. Piacentini admitted to consuming cocaine recreationally two days before the competition, though he claimed no intent to enhance performance. Cocaine is a prohibited stimulant under WADA’s 2007 Prohibited List, which CONI follows, making Piacentini’s use a clear anti-doping violation. While CONI initially imposed a reduced suspension of one year and eight months, citing exceptional circumstances under its rules, WADA appealed, arguing the reduction was unjustified given Piacentini’s intentional consumption of a banned substance.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), led by arbitrator Patrick Lafranchi, reviewed the case and determined that intentional use of a prohibited substance does not qualify as an exceptional circumstance warranting a reduced penalty. The panel referenced strict precedents where reductions were only granted in cases like contaminated supplements or unauthorized administration by medical personnel. Since Piacentini knowingly consumed cocaine, the CAS upheld WADA’s appeal and reinstated the standard two-year suspension, effective from the date of his provisional suspension in July 2007. Additionally, all competitive results Piacentini achieved from June 8, 2007, were disqualified, including forfeiture of medals, points, and prizes.
The ruling reinforced the strict enforcement of anti-doping regulations, emphasizing that intentional violations, even in non-competitive contexts, do not merit leniency. The decision aligned with WADA’s stance on maintaining the integrity of sports by ensuring consistent sanctions under the World Anti-Doping Code. The CAS’s jurisdiction was established under relevant provisions of the Code and CONI’s rules, and the panel exercised its authority to modify the contested decision. Piacentini did not participate in the hearing due to cost concerns, while CONI and the Italian Table Tennis Federation waived their rights to contest the proceedings. The case serves as a precedent for upholding stringent anti-doping measures and deterring intentional violations. The panel’s decision replaced the earlier ruling, underscoring the importance of uniform sanctions in preserving fair competition.