The case involves Brazilian cyclist Kleber Da Silva Ramos, who participated in the 2016 Rio Olympic Games and was found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation. During an out-of-competition doping control on 31 July 2016, his sample tested positive for methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta (CERA), a prohibited substance under the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Prohibited List. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) notified Ramos of the adverse analytical finding in his A sample on 7 August 2016. Although he requested the analysis of his B sample, he did not attend its opening. The IOC subsequently sought a provisional suspension from the Court of Arbitration for Sport Anti-Doping Division (CAS ADD), which Ramos voluntarily accepted on 10 August 2016. The CAS ADD panel deemed the IOC’s application moot due to his acceptance but declared him ineligible pending the B sample results.
On 14 August 2016, the B sample confirmed the presence of CERA, and a second opinion by Dr. Jean-Francois Naud upheld the findings. The panel proceeded without a hearing, relying on written submissions. The IOC argued that the presence of CERA in both samples constituted a violation under Article 2.1 of the IOC Anti-Doping Rules, warranting disqualification and ineligibility. Ramos did not contest the merits, waived his right to an oral hearing, and submitted to the provisional suspension. The CAS ADD confirmed its jurisdiction under the IOC Olympic Charter and Anti-Doping Rules, which delegate authority to the CAS ADD for doping-related matters during the Games.
Under the IOC Anti-Doping Rules, the presence of a prohibited substance in an athlete’s sample constitutes a violation, and the panel found Ramos in violation based on the confirmed presence of CERA. The case highlights the strict enforcement of anti-doping regulations in international competitions and the procedural steps taken to ensure fairness while upholding the integrity of sport. Ramos faced immediate suspension, disqualification of his Olympic results, forfeiture of any medals or prizes, and exclusion from the Games. His accreditation was withdrawn, and the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) was tasked with managing further sanctions beyond the Olympics. The decision reaffirms the principle of strict liability in anti-doping regulations and underscores the serious consequences of violations.