The case involves an arbitration decision by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) regarding an anti-doping rule violation (ADRV) by Russian figure skater Darja Dmitrijevna Beklemiscseva, who competes for Hungary. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) appealed a decision by the Hungarian National Anti-Doping Organization (HUNADO), which had imposed a seven-month ineligibility period on the athlete after she tested positive for furosemide, a prohibited diuretic and masking agent, during an out-of-competition test on October 25, 2017. The athlete waived analysis of her B sample, and under HUNADO’s Anti-Doping Regulations, the presence of a prohibited substance constituted an ADRV, with a standard sanction of two years unless the violation was proven intentional. To receive a reduced sanction, the athlete needed to demonstrate no significant fault or negligence and provide evidence of how the substance entered her body. However, the athlete’s explanation—that the substance entered her system through contaminated water from a glass used by a friend taking the drug "Lasix"—was deemed speculative and lacked credible evidence.
WADA argued that HUNADO’s decision to impose only a seven-month sanction was incorrect, as the athlete failed to meet the burden of proof required for a reduction. The case proceeded before a sole arbitrator, Prof. Jens Evald, who determined that the standard two-year sanction should apply due to the lack of substantiated evidence supporting the athlete’s claims. The arbitrator emphasized that mere speculation was insufficient to meet the required standard of proof. Pharmacokinetic evidence from WADA’s expert indicated that the concentration of furosemide in the athlete’s sample was inconsistent with residual exposure and suggested recent ingestion of a full dose. The athlete also failed to provide documentation proving her friend’s prescription for Lasix or details about his medical condition, further weakening her defense.
The proceedings were conducted based on written submissions, as neither the athlete nor HUNADO filed a formal response within the prescribed deadlines. The arbitrator concluded that the ADRV was established and that the athlete failed to justify a reduced sanction. The final award upheld WADA’s appeal, imposing the standard two-year ineligibility period, effective from December 1, 2017, the date of her provisional suspension. The decision also disqualified all competitive results obtained by the athlete from October 25, 2017, onward, including forfeiture of medals, points, and prizes. The ruling reinforced the strict liability principle in anti-doping regulations, where athletes are responsible for substances in their bodies, while also highlighting the need for credible evidence to avoid standard sanctions. The case underscores the importance of stringent enforcement of anti-doping rules and the consequences of violations.