The case involves Brazilian canoeist Denise Consuelo Oliveira, who tested positive for the prohibited substance 19-norandrosterone, an anabolic agent, during an in-competition doping control at the Brazilian Championship of Canoe on 15 December 2013. The substance was confirmed in both her A and B samples by a WADA-accredited laboratory, with levels exceeding the established threshold. Oliveira admitted to using the substance but claimed it was for aesthetic purposes, not performance enhancement, and stated she was unaware it was prohibited in sports. The Brazilian Superior Tribunal de Justiça Desportiva Da Canoagem (STJD) initially imposed a one-year suspension, allowing her to retain her records and achievements. WADA appealed this decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), arguing the sanction was too lenient and seeking a two-year suspension and disqualification of all competitive results from the date of the sample collection.
The CAS, under sole arbitrator Juan Pablo Arriagada Aljaro, ruled that 19-norandrosterone is a prohibited substance but not a specified one, meaning the standard sanction for a first violation is a two-year period of ineligibility unless mitigating circumstances apply. The arbitrator found Oliveira’s claim of non-performance-related use insufficient to reduce the sanction under anti-doping regulations. The decision emphasized the strict liability principle, holding athletes responsible for any prohibited substances in their bodies regardless of intent. Oliveira’s actions were deemed negligent, as she failed to verify the substance’s contents, despite its name indicating it was a steroid, and did not consult a specialist. Additionally, she participated in competitions knowing the substance was prohibited.
The CAS upheld WADA’s appeal, overturning the STJD’s decision and imposing a two-year suspension effective from the date of the sample collection. Oliveira was disqualified from all competitive results obtained from 15 December 2013 to 15 December 2014, including forfeiture of medals, points, and prizes. Results after this period remained unaffected. The ruling reaffirmed WADA’s authority to appeal decisions directly to CAS and clarified that personal justifications, such as aesthetic use, do not qualify as exceptional circumstances for reduced sanctions. The case underscores the importance of strict adherence to anti-doping regulations and the consequences of failing to exercise due diligence regarding substance use. The final decision highlights the consistent application of sanctions for prohibited substance violations, ensuring fairness and integrity in sports.