The case involves Alexsandra de Aguiar Gonçalves, a Brazilian weightlifter, who appealed a four-year suspension imposed by the International Weightlifting Federation (IWF) after testing positive for Boldenone, a prohibited steroid, during the 2015 South American Senior, Junior, and Youth Championships. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) reviewed her appeal, with a panel comprising Michael Beloff, Jeffrey Benz, and Denis Oswald. Gonçalves argued that the positive test resulted from unintentional contamination, claiming the Boldenone entered her system through a contaminated Vitamin B12 injection purchased outside Brazil. She emphasized her clean record, due diligence in checking medications, and financial constraints preventing her from analyzing the B sample. She also highlighted her efforts to comply with anti-doping regulations, including consulting professionals and cross-referencing substances with the WADA Prohibited List. The IWF countered that she failed to prove the source of contamination or establish no significant fault, warranting the standard four-year ban. The CAS panel concluded that her arguments—her clean record, good faith efforts, and financial limitations—did not sufficiently demonstrate no significant fault or mitigating circumstances under anti-doping rules. The panel upheld the IWF’s decision, stressing that the presence of Boldenone, a known performance-enhancing drug, warranted strict liability, and her explanations did not meet the burden of proof required to reduce the sanction.
Gonçalves further contended that the low concentration of Boldenone in her sample (24 ng/mL and 1 ng/mL for metabolites) was insufficient to enhance performance and argued that her fundamental rights were denied due to financial constraints preventing her from accessing the B sample and relevant documents. She also pointed to the severe personal and professional consequences she faced, including loss of sponsorship and salary, and offered to assist in uncovering anti-doping violations in exchange for a reduced suspension. The IWF maintained that her explanation was speculative and unsupported by evidence, emphasizing athletes' personal responsibility for substances in their bodies. They dismissed her claims about the Vitamin B12 being prescribed, citing a lack of corroborating evidence, and questioned her account of the doping control process.
The CAS panel confirmed its jurisdiction under the IWF Anti-Doping Policy and applied the 2015 World Anti-Doping Code, with Swiss law as a subsidiary. The panel found no breach of Gonçalves' fundamental rights, as she had the opportunity to request a B Sample test but chose not to. Her claims of contamination were dismissed due to insufficient evidence, and her clean record and assertions of careful medication use were deemed inadequate to mitigate the violation. The panel also rejected her plea for a reduced sanction based on substantial assistance, citing a lack of corroborated evidence. The ruling affirmed the mandatory four-year ineligibility period, underscoring the strict liability principle in anti-doping regulations, where athletes bear full responsibility for prohibited substances in their bodies unless they can provide compelling evidence to the contrary. The appeal was dismissed, and the IWF’s original decision was upheld, reinforcing the rigorous standards applied in doping cases and the challenges athletes face in proving lack of intent or fault. The decision aligns with established CAS jurisprudence, highlighting the importance of robust evidence in such disputes.