The case centers on Erkand Qerimaj, an Albanian weightlifter, who appealed a two-year suspension imposed by the International Weightlifting Federation (IWF) after testing positive for methylhexaneamine, a prohibited stimulant, during the 2012 European Championships. The substance was traced to a supplement called Body Surge, which Qerimaj had taken on the advice of his personal trainer, N. Although the supplement’s label listed 1,3-dimethylamylamine, a synonym for methylhexaneamine, Qerimaj claimed he was unaware of this and relied on his trainer’s assurance that the product was safe. He also declared the supplement on his doping control form. The IWF Doping Hearing Panel upheld the suspension, arguing Qerimaj failed to prove he did not intend to enhance performance. Qerimaj then appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), seeking a reduced sanction.
The CAS panel examined whether Article 10.4 of the IWF Anti-Doping Policy (ADP), which allows for reduced sanctions for specified substances under certain conditions, applied. The panel emphasized that the key issue was not whether Qerimaj intended to enhance performance but whether his conduct showed doping-related intent. The CAS found that Qerimaj lacked direct or indirect intent to dope, as he had relied on his trainer’s advice and had no prior doping violations. However, the panel noted his negligence in failing to independently verify the supplement’s contents. While his lack of anti-doping education and unintentional use of the substance warranted some leniency, his blind trust in his trainer’s advice without further research limited the extent of the reduction. The panel concluded that the two-year sanction was appropriate given his degree of fault.
The case highlights the challenges in distinguishing between indirect intent and negligence in doping violations, as well as the importance of athlete diligence in verifying supplements. It also underscores that while lack of intent to enhance performance is relevant, it does not absolve athletes of responsibility for their negligence. The CAS upheld the IWF’s decision, affirming the two-year suspension. However, the panel later reconsidered the commencement of the ineligibility period, ruling that it should start from the date of sample collection due to procedural flaws in the IWF hearing. Ultimately, the CAS partially upheld Qerimaj’s appeal, reducing his suspension to 15 months and adjusting the start date to April 12, 2012.
The decision reflects the strict liability principle in anti-doping regulations, emphasizing athletes' responsibility for substances they ingest. It also acknowledges mitigating factors, such as limited access to anti-doping education in Albania, but maintains that athletes must exercise due diligence. The case serves as a cautionary tale about the risks of relying on unverified supplement advice and the severe consequences of doping violations, even when unintentional. The CAS’s ruling balances fairness with the need to uphold the integrity of competitive sports.