The case involves an arbitration decision by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) regarding an anti-doping rule violation (ADRV) committed by Kenyan bodybuilder Eliud Musumba Ayiro. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) appealed a decision by the Sports Disputes Tribunal of Kenya, which had imposed a two-year period of ineligibility on the athlete after his A sample tested positive for prohibited substances, including trenbolone, epitrenbolone, and a tamoxifen metabolite. The athlete waived his right to have his B sample analyzed, which under Article 2.1 of the RADO Anti-Doping Rules (ADR) constituted sufficient proof of an ADRV. The CAS emphasized the strict liability principle, meaning athletes are responsible for any prohibited substances found in their samples, regardless of intent or fault.
The arbitration panel, consisting of a sole arbitrator, Markus Manninen, proceeded based on written submissions as the respondents—Africa Zone V RADO, the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya (ADAK), and the athlete—did not participate in the proceedings. WADA argued that the presence of prohibited substances in the athlete's sample warranted a four-year ineligibility period, as the substances were non-specified and the athlete failed to prove the violation was unintentional. The athlete claimed he had used the substances for medical reasons, citing low testosterone and self-medication with Nolvadex D, which contained tamoxifen. However, his explanations were inconsistent, lacking concrete evidence such as prescriptions, purchase records, or credible medical testimony.
The Sole Arbitrator found the athlete's claims unconvincing, noting that Nolvadex D could not account for the presence of trenbolone and its metabolite. The athlete also failed to declare the medication on the Doping Control Form. Under CAS precedent, an ADRV can only be deemed unintentional in rare cases with robust evidence, such as credible testimony or medical proof. Since the athlete provided no such evidence, the violation was deemed intentional, resulting in a four-year ineligibility period. The ban was backdated to October 3, 2016, the date of his provisional suspension, with credit for time already served.
All competitive results obtained by the athlete from July 30, 2016, were disqualified, including forfeiture of medals, points, and prizes. The CAS upheld WADA's appeal, overturning the Sports Disputes Tribunal's decision and imposing the full sanctions. The ruling reinforces the strict liability principle and the high burden on athletes to substantiate claims of unintentional violations. The case underscores the importance of maintaining fairness and integrity in sports by enforcing consistent anti-doping standards. The final decision was issued by the Court of Arbitration for Sport on December 14, 2017, dismissing all other motions or requests for relief.