NATIONAL FEDERATION CASE

FINA DOPING PANEL DECISION
on CEZAR BADITA (ROM) DOPING CASE

BACK TO DOPING HOME

The FINA Doping Panel decided on 10 February 2001 the following conclusion on Cezar Badita Doping Case A suspension of one (1) year, shall be imposed on Mr. Cezar Badita, the suspension to start with 10th February 2001.  

Also a retroactive sanction involving the   

Cancellation of all results achieved by the swimmer during
the period prior to the date the suspension takes effect
and extending back to six (6) months before 20 May 2000
 
is imposed.


THE FACTS

The swimmer was tested in May 2000 on two consecutive days with an interval of less than 24 hours. On the first day he tested positive for 19-Norandrosterone (10ng/mL). On the second day he tested negative (only traces of Nandrolone, far below the threshold of 2ng/mL).

The swimmer denied to having taken any prohibited substance, not even any kind of a precursor which might have contained Nandrolone. He referred to several tests he underwent before the day, on which he was found to be positive, and to several tests he underwent after, all these tests having been negative.

IN LAW
The expert witness, heard by the FINA Doping Panel, stated that the great difference in the finding of Nandrolone metabolites in the urine of the same swimmer on two consecutive days is giving evidence that the substance detected was not given to the swimmer by muscular ingestion. Nandrolone ingested orally „disappears“ in the fluids of an athlete very fast, and on the first days the concentration of Nandrolone metabolites is going down much faster than on the later days. The difference between 10ng/mL on the first day and only traces of Nandro-lone on the second day is also indicating that the substance detected got into the body of the swimmer only in a very short time period before the first test. The swimmer may have taken an impurity of Nandrolone or a Nandrolone precursor in some other product, including nutritional supplements. As a matter of fact, companies producing nutritioners or comparable substances very often do not declare openly all the ingredients of a product. Also it may happen that a company after having produced a substance containing Nandrolone uses the same container without a careful cleaning for the production without Nandrolone.

Due to these reasons the IOC during and after the Olympic Games 2000 circulated the warn-ing to everybody, not to make use of any product, especially nutritional supplements without being absolutely sure that it does not contain a prohibited substance.

CONTENTIONS and MOTIONS
The swimmer committed a doping offence (FINA Rules DC 2.1(a), DC 3.1 C), related to an anabolic agent. According to FINA Rules the minimum sanction for this offence is a four (4) years' suspension (FINA Rule DC 9.1.1). Due to the principles of „strict liability“ provided for in FINA Rules the swimmer's right to a hearing was restricted (FINA Rule DC 9.1.7). He was to be sanctioned.

However, the Panel found  that FINA Rule DC 9.10 was to be applied, according to which the minimum sanction may be lessened if the swimmer can clearly establish how the prohibited substance got into the competitor's fluids and that it was not the result of any negligence by the swimmer:

According to the statements of the expert witness the prohibited substance got orally into the body of the swimmer only one or two days before the first day of the competition on which the swimmer was tested. The Panel is convinced that the swimmer did not take the prohibited substance intentionally. One or two days before the first day of the competition he was well aware that he was going to compete and that he might be tested. The prohibited substance got into his body by taking an impurity of Nandrolone or a Nandrolone precursor without him being aware of it. This was not the consequence of negligence. The general warning by the IOC not to rely on declarations of ingredients attached to substances offered on the open market was circulated earliest at the time of the Olympic Games 2000, many months after the test concerned was carried out.

DECISION
Having satisfied the criteria for a lesser sanction than the minimum of four (4) years' suspension the FINA Doping Panel considered a

suspension of one (1) year

to be adequate.

TOP

    


  Competitions   |   Results     |   Calendar  |   Biographies   |   Records  | Rankings
Press Releases   |     Publications    |   Olympic News   |   Doping News
 
Directory   |   Constitution   | Development Programme  | Officials Lists Email

©1996-2001 FINA. All Rights reserved.