The case revolves around Hiromasa Fujimori, a Japanese swimmer who tested positive for methylephedrine, a prohibited stimulant, during the 2018 FINA World Championships in Hangzhou. The concentration of the substance in his sample exceeded the decision limit, confirming an anti-doping rule violation (ADRV). Fujimori did not contest the violation but sought to reduce his two-year period of ineligibility by proving the substance entered his system inadvertently, likely through contaminated rice balls he consumed before the competition. He provided a detailed account of his activities and ruled out other potential sources, emphasizing his clean record of 52 prior negative doping tests and his cooperation with the investigation.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) upheld FINA's decision, stating Fujimori failed to provide concrete evidence demonstrating how the methylephedrine entered his system. To benefit from a reduced sanction, an athlete must prove the source of the prohibited substance on a balance of probabilities, meaning the scenario presented must be more likely than not. Fujimori’s arguments, including contamination from supplements or rice balls, were deemed insufficient without definitive proof. Expert testimony from Professor Martial Saugy contradicted Fujimori’s claim, stating the concentration of methylephedrine in his urine was consistent with direct ingestion of a therapeutic dose, not accidental contamination. The CAS panel emphasized that mere assertions of innocence or plausible theories are inadequate without supporting evidence.
The ruling reinforced the strict liability principle in anti-doping regulations, where athletes are responsible for any prohibited substances in their bodies regardless of intent. The panel clarified that the principle of proportionality is already embedded in the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC), particularly in provisions allowing reduced sanctions under "No Significant Fault or Negligence" or "No Fault or Negligence." However, Fujimori could not meet the burden of proof required for these exceptions. The panel also rejected the idea of applying proportionality outside the established rules to circumvent strict liability.
Fujimori’s provisional suspension began on January 1, 2019, and the two-year ineligibility period was confirmed, ending on December 31, 2020. The CAS concluded that FINA’s decision was legally sound, as Fujimori could not establish the origin of the prohibited substance, leaving no basis for a reduction in sanction. The case highlights the challenges athletes face in proving inadvertent ingestion of prohibited substances and the rigorous evidentiary standards required to overturn or reduce sanctions. It also underscores the tension between strict rule application and the need for fairness in cases where the athlete’s fault is minimal. The panel expressed regret over its inability to reduce the sanction and urged WADA to review the rules to allow more flexibility in similar cases involving exceptional circumstances.
Ultimately, the CAS dismissed Fujimori’s appeal, reaffirming the two-year ban and rejecting requests for alternative solutions or further backdating of the sanction. The decision underscores the importance of concrete evidence in anti-doping proceedings and the limitations athletes face when seeking leniency under the current regulatory framework.