The case revolves around a dispute between the Bulgarian Weightlifting Federation (BWF) and the International Weightlifting Federation (IWF) concerning sanctions imposed on the BWF due to multiple doping violations by its athletes. The IWF initially imposed a $500,000 fine and banned BWF athletes from participating in the next Youth Olympic and Olympic Games, citing Article 12.3.1.7 of the IWF Anti-Doping Policy. The decision was communicated in November 2015 and later confirmed by the IWF Executive Board through a circular vote. The BWF appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), arguing procedural irregularities and disproportionate penalties.
The CAS examined the validity of the sanctions, focusing on three key issues. First, it ruled that the IWF Executive Board’s decision via circular vote was invalid because the IWF Constitution and By-Laws did not explicitly permit such a procedure. The CAS emphasized that, absent specific provisions, only unanimous written consent from all voting members could substitute for an in-person meeting. Second, the CAS clarified its role as a reviewing body, referring the matter back to the IWF for reconsideration to ensure procedural fairness. Third, the CAS addressed the principle of ne bis in idem (no double jeopardy), stating that the automatic Olympic ban and the fine were distinct sanctions with different purposes and consequences, thus not constituting double punishment.
The BWF contested the fine, arguing it was disproportionate and financially crippling, given the federation's reliance on state funding. It also highlighted inconsistencies in the IWF’s handling of similar cases, such as Azerbaijan, which received a fine but no suspension. The BWF further claimed the fine violated Swiss law and principles of due process, as it was imposed without proper delegation from the IWF Executive Board. The IWF defended its decision, asserting its autonomy under Swiss law and the need for strict anti-doping measures to uphold the integrity of the sport. It argued the fine was justified by the severity of the violations and aligned with international efforts to combat doping.
The CAS ultimately invalidated the fine due to procedural flaws but upheld the Olympic ban, remanding the case to the IWF for further review. The ruling underscored the importance of clear governance rules and procedural fairness in sports disciplinary actions. The CAS suggested a one-year suspension of the BWF as a proportionate sanction, though this recommendation was non-binding. The case highlights tensions between enforcing anti-doping regulations and ensuring fair treatment of member federations, emphasizing the need for consistency and transparency in disciplinary processes. The final outcome reinforced the principle that sports federations must adhere to statutory rules when imposing sanctions.