Anti-doping rules violation

It is the athletes’ personal duty to ensure that no prohibited substance enters their bodies. Athletes are responsible for any prohibited substance or its metabolites or markers found to be present in their samples. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence or knowing use on the athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an anti-doping rule violation.

Sufficient proof of an anti-doping rule violation is established by any of the following:

-        presence of a prohibited substance or its metabolites or markers in the athlete’s A sample where the athlete waives analysis of the B sample and the B sample is not analyzed;

-        where the athlete’s B sample is analyzed and the analysis of the athlete’s B sample confirms the presence of the prohibited substance or its metabolites or markers found in the athlete’s A sample;

-        where the athlete’s A or B sample is split into two parts and the analysis of the confirmation part of the split sample confirms the presence of the prohibited substance or its metabolites or markers found in the first part of the split sample.

Excepting those substances for which a Decision Limit is specifically identified in the Prohibited List or a Technical Document, the presence of any reported quantity of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in an Athlete’s Sample shall constitute an anti-doping rule violation.

It is each athlete’s personal duty to ensure that no prohibited substance enters their bodies and that no prohibited method is used. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence or knowing use on the athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an anti-doping rule violation for use of a prohibited substance or a prohibited method. 

The success or failure of the use or attempted use of a prohibited substance or prohibited method is not material. It is sufficient that the prohibited substance or prohibited method was used or attempted to be used for an anti-doping rule violation to be committed. 

Evading sample collection; or refusing or failing to submit to sample collection without compelling justification after notification by a duly authorized person.

Any combination of three missed tests and/or filing failures, as defined in the International Standard for Results Management, within a twelve-month period by an athlete in a Registered testing pool.

Intentional conduct which subverts the doping control process, including preventing the collection of a sample, affecting or making impossible the analysis of a sample, falsifying documents submitted to an anti-doping organization or TUE committee, procuring false testimony from witnesses, committing any other fraudulent act to affect results management or the imposition of consequences.

Possession by an athlete or an athlete support person of any prohibited substance or any prohibited method (in-competition or out-of-competition) unless the athlete or athlete support person establishes that the possession is consistent with a Therapeutic Use Exemption or other acceptable justification.

Assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, conspiring, covering up or any other type of intentional complicity or attempted complicity involving an anti-doping rule violation, attempted anti-doping rule violation or violation of prohibition against participation during provisional suspension or ineligibility by another person.

Any act which threatens or seeks to intimidate another person with the intent of discouraging the person from the good-faith reporting of information that relates to an alleged anti-doping rule violation, retaliation against a person who, in good faith, has provided evidence or information that relates to an alleged anti-doping rule violation