The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued a ruling on January 22, 2009, in the case of Danish cyclist Michael Rasmussen versus the Monaco Cycling Federation (FMC), upholding a two-year suspension for multiple violations of anti-doping regulations. The case stemmed from Rasmussen's failure to comply with out-of-competition testing requirements during the 2007 cycling season, including missed tests and providing false location information to the International Cycling Union (UCI). The UCI had included Rasmussen in its target group for testing, requiring him to submit accurate and timely updates about his whereabouts. Between May 2007 and January 2008, Rasmussen received four warnings for non-compliance, including missed tests in Italy and false claims about his location. The FMC's disciplinary commission found him guilty of violating Articles 15.3, 15.4, and 15.5 of the UCI Anti-Doping Regulations (RAD), which cover missed tests, failure to update location information, and providing false details, respectively.
Rasmussen appealed to the CAS, seeking either acquittal or a reduced three-month suspension, arguing that his violations were not deliberate. The CAS rejected his appeal, ruling that his repeated failures to comply with reporting requirements constituted intentional evasion of anti-doping controls. The tribunal emphasized that the term "national anti-doping organization" includes the agency of an athlete's nationality, in this case the Danish Anti-Doping Agency (ADD), not just their affiliated federation. It also clarified that location updates must be provided promptly and truthfully, with any delays or false information treated as violations. The CAS further ruled that intentionally providing false location details, which disrupts testing, is equivalent to evading a test under both the UCI RAD and the 2009 World Anti-Doping Code.
The tribunal dismissed Rasmussen's arguments regarding jurisdictional issues and procedural discrepancies, including his claim that the ADD lacked authority over him as a member of the Monaco federation. It also rejected his request for a reduced sanction under Article 266 RAD, which allows for leniency in cases of cooperation with anti-doping investigations, finding his efforts insufficient and untimely. The CAS upheld the FMC's original two-year suspension, reinforcing the importance of athletes' compliance with anti-doping protocols. The decision underscored the strict enforcement of anti-doping regulations and the consequences of intentionally misleading authorities, setting a precedent for future cases involving whereabouts violations and evasion of testing. The ruling concluded with the dismissal of Rasmussen's appeal and confirmation of the FMC's disciplinary measures.