The case involves an arbitration decision by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) Anti-Doping Division (ADD) concerning Uzbekistani weightlifter Ruslan Nurudinov, who was accused of an anti-doping rule violation during the 2012 London Olympics. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) initiated the case after re-analysis of Nurudinov's urine samples, conducted in 2018 by a WADA-accredited laboratory, detected the presence of dehydrochlormethyltestosterone (oral turinabol), a prohibited anabolic steroid. The CAS ADD had jurisdiction over the matter as the IOC had delegated its authority to the ADD for such proceedings. The applicable rules were the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC) and the IOC's anti-doping regulations, with Swiss law serving as a supplementary framework.
Nurudinov provided two urine samples during the 2012 Olympics, which initially showed no adverse findings. However, the 2018 re-analysis confirmed the presence of the prohibited substance. The International Testing Agency (ITA), acting on behalf of the IOC, charged Nurudinov with an anti-doping rule violation. The athlete accepted the adverse analytical finding (AAF), waived his right to further testing of the B samples, and did not contest the results. The IOC argued that the presence of the substance constituted a violation under Article 2.1.2 of the WADC and suggested intentional use under Article 2.2, given the substance's doping-specific nature. The IOC sought the disqualification of Nurudinov's Olympic results, including the forfeiture of any medals or prizes.
The Sole Arbitrator, Murray Rosen QC, reviewed the case without a hearing, as neither party requested one. The arbitrator confirmed the ADD's jurisdiction and the validity of the proceedings under the ADD Rules. Given the uncontested evidence and Nurudinov's acceptance of the violation, the arbitrator ruled in favor of the IOC, disqualifying the athlete's results from the 2012 Olympics and imposing the requested sanctions. The decision highlights the strict liability principle in anti-doping regulations, emphasizing that athletes are responsible for any prohibited substances found in their samples, regardless of intent. The ruling also addressed procedural matters, such as costs and the possibility of an appeal, noting that the award could be appealed to the CAS Appeals Arbitration Division within 21 days. The case underscores the rigorous enforcement of anti-doping rules in international sports and the serious consequences of violations.