The case involves Lisa Christina Nemec, a Croatian long-distance runner, who appealed against a doping violation decision by the Croatian Institute for Toxicology and Anti-Doping (CITA) and the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF). The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued its final award on April 27, 2017, upholding the decision. Nemec tested positive for recombinant erythropoietin (rEPO) during an out-of-competition test on October 6, 2015. The doping control officer (DCO) conducted the test alone due to the assistant DCO's absence, which Nemec argued was a procedural irregularity. However, the laboratory confirmed the adverse analytical finding (AAF) in both the A and B samples.
Under CITA Anti-Doping Rules (ADR), the burden of proof lay with CITA to establish an anti-doping rule violation (ADRV) to the comfortable satisfaction of the panel, a standard higher than balance of probability but lower than beyond reasonable doubt. Nemec attempted to rebut this by alleging procedural departures and sample tampering, claiming the DCO spiked her urine samples with rEPO as part of a conspiracy against her and her athletic club, AC Svetice. She cited financial disputes and rivalries within Croatian athletics as motives for the alleged sabotage. The CAS panel, however, found no credible evidence to support these claims. Witness testimonies and phone records did not substantiate her allegations, and the DCO's conduct was deemed professional and consistent with standard procedures.
Nemec also submitted a polygraph test report asserting her innocence, but the panel ruled it unreliable without expert testimony. Experts testified that spiking samples to produce the observed rEPO results would be highly improbable without extensive prior experimentation. The panel dismissed Nemec's procedural objections, noting that minor deviations, such as the absence of an assistant DCO, did not invalidate the test under the International Standard for Testing and Investigations (ISTI). The decision to test for rEPO was justified by Nemec's status in the Registered Testing Pool and suspicious biological passport data.
The panel concluded that Nemec committed an ADRV under Article 2.1 of CITA ADR and IAAF Rule 32.2(a), as the presence of rEPO was confirmed. She failed to prove the violation was unintentional or caused by procedural flaws. The four-year ineligibility period imposed by CITA, running from October 29, 2015, to October 28, 2019, was upheld, with credit given for the provisional suspension served. The CAS dismissed Nemec's appeal, affirming the strict liability principle in anti-doping regulations and emphasizing the high burden of proof required to contest violations. The case underscores the rigorous scrutiny applied in doping disputes and the challenges athletes face in overturning adverse findings without substantial evidence.