The case involves an appeal by Rashid Mohd Ali Alabbar against sanctions imposed by the Fédération Equestre Internationale (FEI) for a doping violation under the FEI Equine Anti-Doping Rules. Alabbar, an amateur endurance rider, competed in a 120 km event in Dubai on February 6, 2012, riding a horse named Cromwell. Post-event testing revealed testosterone in the horse's system, exceeding the FEI's threshold limit for geldings. Alabbar attributed the positive test to a supplement called "The Enhancer," which contained Dehidroepiandrosterone (DHEA), a substance not explicitly listed on the FEI Prohibited Substances list but known to have effects similar to testosterone. He argued he had checked the supplement's listed ingredients against the prohibited list but had not conducted further research, such as an internet search, which would have revealed the presence of DHEA.
The FEI Tribunal found Alabbar at fault, emphasizing that under anti-doping rules, a Person Responsible (PR) must exercise "utmost caution" to avoid banned substances. The Tribunal concluded his failure to thoroughly investigate the supplement's ingredients constituted significant fault or negligence, warranting the imposed sanctions. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) panel upheld the Tribunal's decision, noting Alabbar had not met the burden of proof to establish "no significant fault or negligence" under the balance of probabilities standard. The panel rejected his argument that a prior violation under the FEI Equine Controlled Medication Rules should not be considered an aggravating factor, clarifying that proportionality does not apply to fixed sanctions under anti-doping rules when no significant fault or negligence is established.
The panel accepted Alabbar's explanation that the supplement caused the presence of DHEA, supported by evidence including invoices, scientific reports, and statements from his veterinarian and feed team. However, it found his reliance on informal and partisan advice insufficient to meet the required standard of care. The panel acknowledged his welfare concerns for the horse but emphasized these did not excuse the administration of a performance-enhancing substance. It also noted procedural flaws in how Alabbar was notified of his prior violation, including a forged acknowledgment and lack of proper communication from the FEI, which undermined fairness but did not alter the outcome.
Ultimately, the CAS panel partially upheld the appeal, amending the FEI Tribunal's decision to impose a 24-month suspension effective immediately, with credit given for the provisional suspension period. The ruling underscores the strict liability principle in anti-doping regulations and the high standard of care required of individuals responsible for horses in competitive events. The case highlights the importance of thorough due diligence when administering supplements to competition animals and the necessity for fair procedural practices by sporting regulators.