The case involves Mohammed Mohammed Noor Adam Hawsawi, a professional footballer who tested positive for amphetamine during a doping control test on November 3, 2015. The Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) and the Saudi Arabian Olympic Committee (SAOC) and Anti-Doping Committee (SAADC) were involved in the subsequent legal proceedings. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) panel, composed of Prof. Martin Schimke, Prof. Luigi Fumagalli, and Mr. Jeffrey Benz, addressed key legal and procedural issues. The panel ruled that arguments presented after the hearing were inadmissible due to their late submission. It emphasized that for non-threshold substances like amphetamine, the mere presence in an athlete's body constitutes an anti-doping violation, regardless of concentration. The panel also clarified that the B-sample analysis is intended only to confirm the presence of the prohibited substance, not to yield identical values to the A-sample. Differences in concentration between the samples do not invalidate the adverse finding.
The player admitted to consuming Arabic Gum, a herbal remedy for joint pain, without verifying its contents or consulting his physician. He claimed ignorance about the provisional suspension rules and participated in two competitions despite being suspended since November 30, 2015. The panel found that the player, who consumed substances with powerful pharmacological properties without verifying their origin or content, should have known the risk of an anti-doping violation. It rejected the argument that low concentration indicated out-of-competition ingestion, noting the difficulty of inferring ingestion dates without additional metabolic data. The panel also determined that using amphetamine to alleviate chronic joint pain could not be considered unrelated to sport performance, as it likely enhanced the player's ability to perform under physical demands.
Regarding the provisional suspension, the panel ruled that the player was not entitled to credit for the suspension period because he did not fully comply with its terms. The player's obligation to respect the suspension in its entirety was underscored, with the panel emphasizing the athlete's responsibility to understand and adhere to the suspension's scope. The panel concluded that the violation was intentional under FIFA's Anti-Doping Regulations, as the player knowingly consumed Arabic Gum without verifying its contents. His failure to disclose its use to his team physician or on the doping control form further undermined his credibility.
The CAS upheld the appeal by FIFA, overturning the earlier decision by the Saudi Arabian Olympic Association's Appeal Panel. The final ruling imposed a four-year suspension on the player, with credit given only for any previously served suspension period, and dismissed all other requests for relief. The decision underscores the strict enforcement of provisional suspensions and the accountability of athletes to comply fully with such measures. The case highlights the complexities of anti-doping regulations, the importance of procedural fairness, and the scrutiny applied to decisions affecting athletes' careers. It also underscores the need for clear evidence and proper adherence to legal standards in doping-related disputes.