The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) did not consider convincing the arguments of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) regarding the delay in the results of the doping test of Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva. The motivational part of the decision is published on the CAS website.
Photo: RIA Novosti
According to the document, WADA stated that international standards only recommend processing the results of doping tests within 20 days, but do not oblige to do so.< /strong> Thus, according to the agency, 40 days during which Valieva's sample was processed is an acceptable period of work. The CAS said it was «quite disturbing to hear such a statement where athletes are required to meet high standards in relation to meeting anti-doping obligations.»
The Court also considered it is inconclusive that the delay in results was attributed to cases of coronavirus infection among laboratory staff in Stockholm. CAS noted that the athlete was not at fault. The court stated that the delay in the verification of the doping test of the skater led to difficulties for the athlete, and also had a negative impact on all parties involved in procedures.
At the hearing, Valiyeva was represented by her mother and lawyer, who told the court that the figure skater did not use trimetazidine intentionally. “The athlete’s representatives stated that she did not use a prohibited substance intentionally, not even for medical reasons.
Most likely, the banned substance got into her body through a household route because of her grandfather, who uses trimetazidine after heart surgery and carries it with him.
The mother of the athlete indicated that the grandfather regularly drove her to training, and trimetazidine was in his car,” the CAS statement says. did not confirm that the drug with trimetazidine was really taken by her grandfather. CAS noted on this occasion that the skater, due to participation in competitions, would not have had enough time to provide sufficient evidence. Also, the court admitted that the result of the doping test could be a technical error, since the concentration of trimetazidine in it was very low.