The case involves Franck Herman Blahoua Betra, a French professional footballer, who appealed a four-year suspension imposed by the Greek National Anti-Doping Council (Intimé) after testing positive for dimethylpentylamine, a banned stimulant, during a doping control on February 4, 2018. The initial analysis of his sample confirmed the presence of the substance, and subsequent testing upheld the findings. Betra was provisionally suspended on March 22, 2018, and later faced disciplinary proceedings, resulting in the four-year suspension starting from the date of the positive test. The decision was formally notified to him on October 29, 2018. Betra filed an appeal with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) on November 19, 2018, seeking a stay of execution and arguing that the suspension exceeded the legal maximum of two years, the decision was not translated into an official language, the doping control was improperly conducted, and his provisional suspension was unjust. He also claimed the decision failed to consider his good faith and had severe professional and financial consequences, including the termination of his contract.
The CAS examined its jurisdiction under the principle of "competence-competence," which allows arbitrators to rule on their own authority. It noted that procedural defects, such as improper notification, do not automatically invalidate a decision unless the party was misled and suffered prejudice. The CAS also emphasized the need to exhaust domestic remedies before appealing internationally, as per Article R47 of the CAS Code. Betra argued that internal appeal mechanisms were either not indicated or non-existent, specifically referencing the absence of the CRSCR (the appeal commission of ESKAN). However, the CAS found that a decision legally exists once communicated, and irregularities in notification do not negate the requirement to exhaust remedies. Betra, represented by legal counsel, had the opportunity to inquire about appeal options but failed to prove that the CRSCR was non-existent or that attempts to appeal were futile.
The CAS reviewed procedural and substantive issues, including Betra's claims of violations during sample collection, such as the lack of gloves and improper hydration advice, as well as concerns about impartiality, as the same entity acted as prosecutor and judge. The CAS also considered jurisdictional matters under Swiss law and Greek anti-doping regulations, particularly whether Betra qualified as an international-level athlete under FIFA’s criteria. Despite Betra's arguments, the CAS concluded that he had not exhausted internal remedies, as required by Article R47, and declared itself incompetent to rule on the appeal. The decision underscores the importance of procedural fairness, the exhaustion of domestic remedies, and the adherence to anti-doping regulations. The case highlights the challenges athletes face in navigating complex legal and procedural requirements in doping disputes, including language barriers, delays, and the financial and professional repercussions of suspensions. The CAS's final decision, issued on October 29, 2019, dismissed Betra's appeal, affirming the suspension and reinforcing the principle that internal remedies must be pursued before seeking international arbitration.