The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) upheld a two-year ineligibility sanction against Egyptian wrestler Karam Gaber for multiple anti-doping violations related to whereabouts filing failures and missed tests. The case, adjudicated by a CAS panel in December 2015, centered on Gaber's responsibilities as an athlete in United World Wrestling's (UWW) Registered Testing Pool, requiring him to submit accurate whereabouts information via the ADAMS system. Gaber accumulated four violations between November 2014 and August 2015, including incomplete filings and inaccurate location details. One notable incident involved Gaber being in Alexandria instead of Cairo as declared, leading to a missed test despite a phone call from the Doping Control Officer (DCO). Gaber argued his wife's hospitalization justified the discrepancy, but the panel ruled this did not qualify as an exceptional circumstance since he could have updated his whereabouts.
The CAS emphasized that athletes must provide precise details to enable testing during the specified 60-minute window, and any failure constitutes a violation. The panel rejected Gaber's appeal, affirming athletes' ultimate responsibility for their whereabouts, regardless of third-party involvement. The decision reinforced strict adherence to anti-doping regulations, underscoring the importance of compliance for fair testing protocols. Gaber's two-year suspension was upheld, highlighting the consequences of negligence in whereabouts reporting.
The case also addressed procedural aspects, including Gaber's timely appeal to CAS and the denial of his request for an additional submission round. A hearing in Lausanne confirmed the fairness of the process. The panel examined each violation, including insufficient filings, inaccessible locations, and Gaber's failure to update his whereabouts despite schedule changes. UWW defended its decision by presenting evidence of Gaber's non-compliance, while Gaber contested the validity of the DCO's actions and argued for reduced responsibility due to personal circumstances. The panel dismissed these arguments, concluding Gaber's negligence as an experienced athlete warranted the sanction.
The ruling reinforced broader principles of athlete accountability in anti-doping, stressing that delegated filing tasks do not absolve athletes of responsibility. It also clarified the conditions for declaring a missed test, such as proper DCO notification and reasonable efforts to locate the athlete. The case serves as a reminder of the stringent requirements athletes face in anti-doping compliance and the rigorous scrutiny applied to violations. Ultimately, the CAS upheld UWW's decision, dismissing Gaber's appeal and maintaining the two-year ineligibility period.