The case involves an arbitration decision by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) regarding an anti-doping rule violation (ADRV) against Nicu Vlad, former President of the Romanian Weightlifting Federation (FRH) and a high-ranking official in the International Weightlifting Federation (IWF). The IWF accused Vlad of assisting in an ADRV related to Romanian weightlifter Roxana Cocos, who tested positive for banned substances in 2012 and manipulated doping samples. The CAS panel addressed jurisdictional issues, admissibility, interpretation of anti-doping rules, statute of limitations, and the nature of the alleged violation. The panel confirmed its jurisdiction under the IWF Anti-Doping Rules (ADR), ruling that procedural deficiencies did not invalidate the proceedings as Vlad was properly notified. The interpretation of the IWF ADR was guided by Swiss law, emphasizing an objective approach to discern the rule-makers' intent. The panel rejected arguments that high-ranking officials like Vlad were exempt from ADR provisions, as this would undermine anti-doping efforts.
The statute of limitations was extended from 8 to 10 years under the 2015 IWF ADR, deemed consistent with Swiss law. The panel accepted various forms of evidence, including authentic correspondence, to establish Vlad’s involvement in Cocos’ doping. The alleged violation centered on Vlad’s failure to enforce provisional suspensions on Cocos, allowing her to compete in the 2012 London Olympics despite her ADRV. This constituted tampering and complicity under the 2009 IWF ADR. The panel noted that even minimal complicity could constitute a violation if there was awareness of the underlying doping offense. Given Vlad’s high-ranking position, the seriousness of the violation, and his deceptive conduct, the panel considered a lifetime ban appropriate under Article 10.3.2 of the IWF ADR, unless exceptional circumstances applied.
Vlad contested the applicability of the 2009 IWF ADR, arguing he was not a member of the IWF or directly involved in athlete support during the 2012 Olympics. He also claimed the case was time-barred under the original 8-year limitation period. The panel dismissed these arguments, finding that Vlad’s roles as FRH President and IWF Vice-President subjected him to the ADR. The panel emphasized that the 2015 extension of the limitation period was valid and did not violate Swiss legal principles. Evidence, including emails from 2012, showed Vlad’s deliberate inaction, and his authority as FRH President obligated him to enforce IWF decisions. The reanalysis of 2012 Olympic samples in 2019 revealed systemic doping issues among Romanian weightlifters, further implicating Vlad.
The Sole Arbitrator concluded that Vlad knowingly assisted in covering up Cocos’ ADRV, enabling her Olympic participation. This decision was based on evidence showing Vlad was notified of Cocos’ provisional suspension and sample manipulation but failed to act. The Arbitrator found that Vlad, given his roles in anti-doping oversight, acted with knowledge and intent. Consequently, Vlad was found guilty of violating Article 2.8 of the 2009 IWF ADR. Given the severity of his misconduct, a lifetime ban from sports-related activities was imposed, effective from the date of the award. The ruling underscored the accountability of sports officials in anti-doping enforcement and the broad scope of prohibited assistance under anti-doping rules. The award is subject to appeal within 21 days under the CAS Appeals Arbitration Division rules.