The case involves an arbitration decision by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) regarding an anti-doping rule violation (ADRV) by Indian weightlifter Mhaskar Meghali. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) appealed a decision by the Indian National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA), which had imposed a one-year period of ineligibility on Meghali after she tested positive for methandienone, a prohibited anabolic steroid. The dispute centered on whether Meghali committed the violation unintentionally and whether the sanction could be reduced due to lack of significant fault or negligence.
Meghali was tested during the 1st Women All Indian Railway Weightlifting Championship on January 14, 2015. Her A-sample revealed methandienone, a substance banned under WADA’s Prohibited List. She waived her right to have the B-sample analyzed and was provisionally suspended on February 9, 2015. During hearings before NADA’s Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel (ADDP), Meghali claimed she was a victim of jealousy and submitted medical records showing she had been prescribed medications containing prohibited substances for knee pain. However, these prescriptions were dated after the doping control, rendering them irrelevant.
The ADDP ruled that Meghali committed the ADRV unintentionally and without significant fault, imposing a one-year suspension retroactive to her provisional suspension. WADA appealed to CAS, arguing that the presence of a prohibited substance alone constitutes an ADRV and that Meghali failed to prove her lack of intent or provide a credible explanation for how the substance entered her system, which is necessary for any reduction in sanction.
The CAS proceedings proceeded without a hearing as neither NADA nor Meghali submitted timely responses. The sole arbitrator, Prof. Christoph Vedder, reviewed the case based on written submissions. WADA maintained that Meghali’s violation was established by the positive test and that her failure to explain the presence of the substance precluded any reduction in sanction. The arbitrator emphasized that under anti-doping rules, an athlete must prove by a balance of probability that they did not knowingly violate the rules or that there was no significant risk of a violation. Mere speculation is insufficient, and actual evidence is required.
Ultimately, the CAS upheld WADA’s appeal, finding that Meghali did not meet the burden of proof to demonstrate lack of intent or justify a reduced sanction. The case reaffirmed the strict liability principle in anti-doping regulations, where athletes are responsible for any prohibited substances in their system unless they can provide a convincing explanation. The decision reinforced that sanctions cannot be reduced if an athlete fails to explain how a prohibited substance entered their body.
In its final ruling, the CAS imposed a four-year period of ineligibility on Meghali, starting from the date of the award, with any previously served suspension deducted from this term. Additionally, all competitive results she achieved between January 14, 2015, and February 9, 2015, were disqualified, leading to the forfeiture of any medals, points, and prizes earned during that period. The ruling underscores the strict enforcement of anti-doping regulations and the consequences of violations, emphasizing the athlete’s responsibility to ensure no prohibited substances enter their system.