“[The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)] cannot accept any of the arguments raised by [Nesta Carter] contending that the test results should be ignored or the case should otherwise be dismissed for certain alleged failures…”
The following are excerpts from the CAS ruling today in the case of 32-year-old Jamaica sprinter Nesta Carter versus the International Olympic Committee (IOC):
The CAS decision to uphold the IOC’s decision of an anti-doping rule violation by the Jamaican as it relates to the men’s 4×100 relay final at the Beijing 2008 Olympics paves the way for the Trinidad and Tobago team of Keston Bledman, Marc Burns, Emmanuel Callender, Richard Thompson and Aaron Armstrong to be awarded gold for their participation in the same event—as the fastest, clean relay team in that event.
On 22 August 2008, Nesta Carter (the “Athlete”) participated in the men’s 4×100 metre relay final at the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing together with Michael Frater, Usain Bolt and Asafa Powell.
Following the race, he provided a urine sample, which was analysed by the National Anti-Doping Laboratory in Beijing within a few days, with negative results.
Nearly eight years later, between April and June 2016, the Athlete’s sample was re-tested by LAD, a WADA-accredited laboratory. The Athlete was subsequently charged with an anti-doping rule violation (ADRV).
The Athlete’s submissions, in essence, may be summarised as follows:
- The case should be dismissed since the Lausanne Laboratory (LAD) did not have any authority to re-test the Athlete’s sample for any substances other than those identified in [IOC Medical and Scientific Director] Dr Richard Budgett’s Letter;
- The case should be dismissed since the re-testing of the Athlete’s sample was contrary to the IOC’s publicly state policy on re-testing;
- The IOC’s delay in bringing these proceedings is of such magnitude that the charge should be dismissed by reason of the prejudice caused to the Athlete;
- The charge against the Athlete breaches the principle of legal certainty.
[…] The Panel concluded, on the specific circumstances of this case, that:
- The re-analysis of the Athlete’s sample collected following the race at the Beijing Games confirmed the presence of MHA (methylhexaneamine);
- It cannot accept any of the arguments raised by the Athlete contending that the test results should be ignored or the case should otherwise be dismissed for certain alleged failures;
- There was a finding of an objective ADRV based on the presence of a prohibited substance in the Athlete’s sample;
- And this case is strictly limited to the consequences related to the Beijing Games and issues linked with fault or negligence are not relevant since sanctions such as ineligibility or disqualification from other events are not at stake; the Panel concludes that the Athlete’s appeal is dismissed and the Appealed Decision is upheld.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport rules that:
- The appeal on 15 February 2017 by Mr Nesta Carter against the decision of the Disciplinary Commission of the International Olympic Committee dated 25 January 2017 is dismissed.
- The decision of the Disciplinary Commission of the International Olympic Committee in the matter of Nesta Carter dated 25 January 2017 is upheld.
- The present arbitration proceeding shall be free, except for the CAS Court Office fee of CHF1,000 (1,000 Swiss Francs), which has already been paid by Mr Nesta Carter and which is retained by the CAS.
- Mr Nesta Carter shall bear his own costs and is ordered to pay the International Olympic Committee the amount of CHF5,000 (5,000 Swiss Francs) as a contribution towards the legal fees and expenses incurred in connection with these arbitral proceedings.
- All other or further motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.