In an unprecedented development, a weightlifter, who tested positive for two banned substances, has escaped sanction due to the broken seal of a bottle containing his ‘B’ sample.
C.P.R. Sudheer Kumar, who bagged bronze medals in the 2006 and 2010 Commonwealth Games, had tested positive for a steroid (testosterone or its pro-hormone) and a stimulant (mephentermine and its metabolite, phentermine) during the 57th inter-Services weightlifting championships held in Chandigarh in February.
Sudheer’s sample was collected on February 6 even though the National Dope Testing Laboratory (NDTL) tested his ‘A’ sample almost after a month (on March 4). Interestingly, Sudheer’s testosterone level was found to be unusually high (102.7).
Sudheer’s requestAfter knowing that his ‘A’ sample returned a positive test, Sudheer, posted in Jamnagar, asked for an opportunity to witness his ‘B’ sample analysis. On March 30, when his ‘B’ sample was brought for analysis, the lifter noticed that the seal of the bottle was broken, and refused to witness the testing.
The NDTL informed the National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA) that the seal was intact at the time of the receipt of the sample and there was the ‘possibility of a manufacturing defect leading to the breaking of the seal’ due to which the ‘B’ sample could not be tested.
NADA, as part of its ‘target testing,’ again collected Sudheer’s samples on May 13. However, the result was ‘negative’ this time.
NADA approached the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the world body said if the seal of the ‘B’ sample was broken, “it would agree with NADA’s suggestion not to go forward with the adverse analytical finding (AAF) detected in the ‘A’ sample.”
WADA’s suggestionWADA also suggested NADA to consider whether it had enough evidence to pursue an anti-doping rule violation (ADRV) under article 2.2 of its code (use or attempted use by an athlete of a prohibited substance, or a prohibited method of anti-doping rules).
“Indeed, while NADA would not benefit from the presumptions set by the code, it could still be able to establish to the satisfaction of the tribunal that the athlete used the prohibited substances detected in his ‘A’ sample,” said the WADA communication, following which NADA issued a notice to Sudheer for an ADRV under article 2.2. Appearing before the Dinesh Dayal-headed disciplinary panel, Sudheer said he was involved in doping, and he had nothing to gain as he was “retiring next year.”
The panel concluded on September 24 that NADA could not collect any further required information in order to prove an ADRV under article 2.2, and exonerated the athlete.
