The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued a ruling on 9 June 2022 in the case between the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the International Canoe Federation (ICF) concerning Russian canoeist Aleksandra Dupik. The case centered on allegations of doping involving the prohibited substance furosemide, stemming from a 2014 urine sample initially reported as negative by the Moscow Laboratory but later implicated in the broader Russian doping scandal. The CAS panel, composed of James Drake QC, Prof. Luigi Fumagalli, and Efraim Barak, evaluated the evidence under the ICF 2009 Anti-Doping Regulations, which hold athletes strictly liable for prohibited substances in their bodies, regardless of intent. The standard of proof required was "comfortable satisfaction," a threshold higher than a balance of probabilities but lower than beyond a reasonable doubt.
The case arose from WADA's appeal against the ICF's decision not to pursue an anti-doping violation against Dupik. WADA argued that evidence, including the McLaren Reports, revealed a systemic doping scheme in Russia where positive tests were concealed. The scheme involved the "Disappearing Positive Methodology," where samples were falsely recorded as negative, and the "Sample Swapping Methodology," where tainted urine was replaced with clean samples. Dupik's 2014 sample, which tested positive for furosemide, was part of this scheme. Despite the ICF's initial reluctance to act due to insufficient direct evidence, WADA contended that circumstantial evidence, including laboratory data and emails, sufficiently proved the violation.
The CAS panel accepted the McLaren Reports as credible evidence of Russia's state-sponsored doping program. It found that Dupik's sample had been manipulated, with emails indicating instructions to "save" her positive result. The panel concluded that Dupik violated Article 2.2 of the ICF Anti-Doping Rules by using a prohibited substance. While the panel acknowledged the seriousness of the violation, it imposed a standard two-year ineligibility period, rejecting WADA's request for an increased sanction due to lack of evidence of multiple violations or direct involvement in sample swapping. The ineligibility period began on the award date, with competitive results disqualified from 19 April 2014 to 31 December 2016, a reduction from the full eight-year span due to fairness considerations.
The ruling emphasized the challenges of addressing historical doping violations and the role of circumstantial evidence in proving anti-doping breaches. It highlighted the tension between enforcing anti-doping regulations and ensuring procedural fairness for athletes, particularly in complex cases involving systemic manipulation. The decision reinforced the importance of maintaining integrity in sports while upholding the principles of justice and proportionality in sanctions. The CAS panel's final award upheld WADA's appeal, overturned the ICF's decision, and imposed the stipulated sanctions on Dupik, marking a significant step in addressing the fallout from Russia's doping scandal.