WADA - Romanian Anti-Doping Agency - WADA v. Muresan

03/02 2010 11:21 0040213115541 APPEAL COMMISSION attached to

NATIONAL ANTI-DOPING AGENC::Y

Bucharest ANA□ DECISION lhlo. 3/8.01.201 O Translation from Romanian: The Appeal Commission convenec1 on 8.01.2010, 12:00 hours, at the headquarters of the National Anti-Doping Agency (;\NAO) in Bucharest, Blvd. Basarabia, No. 37-39, Sector 2, fer the settlement of thia appeal filed by the World Anti-Doping Agency 0/VADA), Stock Exchange Tower, 800 Victoria Square, Suite 1700, P.O. Box 120, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, re,;:>resented by dr. Francois Kaiser, i, Place Saint-Francois, P.O. Box 7191, 1002 Lausanne, Switzerland, against Decision fio. 8/04.08.2009 of the Hearing Comn·1ission of Athletes and Athlete Support Personnel who infringed the anti-doping renulations, which decided the sanctioning with a "reprimand" of athlete MAdalina Ve1Jonica Mure§an, member of Club Sportiv Municipal Baia Mare [Baia Mare Municipal Sport Club), wíthout the application of the sanction of suspension from the sport activíty, accordíng to the provisions of art. 37 of Law No. 227/2006 regarding the preventicr, and fight against doping in sport, republished, because she was guilty of the brE!i:3Ch of the provisions of art. 2 para. {2) letter a) of the said law. The debates took place on 15 D,1rcember 2009 at the headquarters of the National Anti-Doping Agency, and the issuance of a decision in thís case was postponed, according to the provisions of Or<:J1er· No. 47/2009 for the approval of the Regulation

The debates took place on 15 D,1rcember 2009 at the headquarters of the National Anti-Doping Agency, and the issuance of a decision in thís case was postponed, according to the provisions of Or<:J1er· No. 47/2009 for the approval of the Regulation far organization and operation of 1:he Appeal Commíssion, as amended, for the date of 08.01 .201 O. The following persons participa,1:ed in the meeting of the Appeal Commission of 15.12.2009: Athlete Muretan Madalina \111fironica, a member of Club Sportiv Municipal Baia Mare, identified by ldentity Card series MM, No. 296846, with her domicile in Baia Mare, str. Petru Rareij, No. 17, entrance B, 4th floor, apt. 37, Maramure§ county; Her coach, Szabo Maria-Maodalena, identified by ldentity Card series MM, No. 226147, with her domicile ir, Baia Mare, Satu Nou de Jos village, Maramurefi county;

The Appeal Commission: Ms. Floarea CHIVU - membE:J

Ms. Carmen TROCAN - member 1 .• -·---· ·¡:;¡.,;.fi;fillei • fitll)l:JI te,• :\1llotl2al • Framezi-Engilü Süfi MINODORA•VASIUCA Aul, nr. 5260 r.:1i: 2167046.;.; ...;.,, _ ___,,,,,.,.03/02 2010 11:21 0040213115541 AHAU Ms. Elena - Magdalena COSTACHE - member Mr. Alin Florín CÁRSTOIU - rnember Mr. Dragofi CONDREA, as presidemt of the Appeal Commission, was absent. In the absence of the president i'.>f the Appeal Commission, the meeting shall be

Ms. Elena - Magdalena COSTACHE - member Mr. Alin Florín CÁRSTOIU - rnember Mr. Dragofi CONDREA, as presidemt of the Appeal Commission, was absent. In the absence of the president i'.>f the Appeal Commission, the meeting shall be chaired according to the provisions of art. 11 of Order No. 47/2009, by the oldest member from among the membern; present, i.e. by Ms. Chivu Floarea. Analyzing the appeal filed by V1.fADA against Decision No. 8/04.08.2009 of the Hearing Commission of Athletes and Athlete Support Personnel who infringed the anti-doping regulations, which dedded the sanctioning with a "reprimand" of athlete Mfidalina Veronica Mure§an, mem l:>er of Club Sportiv Municipal Baia Mare, according to the provisions of art. 37 of La\ii.r No. 22712006 regarding the preventíon and fight against doping in sport, republished, because she was guilty of the breach of the provisions of art. 2 para. (2) le:tter a) of the said law, the Appeal Commission establishes as follows: In fact, by Decision No. 8/04.0K2009, the Hearing Commission of Athletes and Athlete Support Personnel who i1nfringed the anti-doping regulations, analyzing File No. 9/2009 regarding athlete Mihdálina Veronica MURE$AN, a member of Club Sportiv Municipal Baia Mares E:::stablished that, as a result of the doping control conducted on 06.06.2009, for th1fi: Fitness sports discipline, on the occasion of the National Fítness and Bodybuildini;i Championshíp - Juniors and Masters, which took place in Slobozia, the analytic rcl!Sult of the sample of athlete Midilina Veronica MURE$AN, holding code 243596::JA, indicated the presence of sibutramine M1 and

National Fítness and Bodybuildini;i Championshíp - Juniors and Masters, which took place in Slobozia, the analytic rcl!Sult of the sample of athlete Midilina Veronica MURE$AN, holding code 243596::JA, indicated the presence of sibutramine M1 and sibutramine M2, metabolites of :sibutramine, which is also revealed by the Test Report No. 236/23.06.2009 issued by the Research and Doping Control Laboratory Division within ANAD. This result was confirmad by the Doping Control Laboratory in Koln, Germany, the result being communicated and registered with the National Anti-Doping Agency under No. 2720/15.07.2009. The substance identified in the t11thlete's sample is included in Class S6.b of the Prohibited List, being a specific sL1!:,stance. Further to the debates, the Hearing Commission of Athletes and Athlete Support Personnel who infringed the anti-1:!-oping regulations established that the athlete used a natural product far losing weight: called "Capsula de Slabit" [Lasing Weight Pi/fi, and the leaflet of such product dC1!:fis not reveal that it would contain prohibited substances, the package of the pb"oduct containing the information "a 100% natural product", and the athlete mentioned in the doping control form that she used this product. 203/02 2010 11:21 0040213115 541 ANA □ ' In consideration of the above, thl::, Hearing Commission of Athletes and Athlete Support Personnel who infringed tl"ie anti-doping regulations decided to sanction the athlete by a "reprimand" accordin9I to the provisions of art. 37 of Law No. 22712006 regarding the prevention and fight ;::1gainst doping in sport, republíshed, because she was guilty of the breach of the prc;,1isions of art. 2 para. (2) letter a) of the said law,

regarding the prevention and fight ;::1gainst doping in sport, republíshed, because she was guilty of the breach of the prc;,1isions of art. 2 para. (2) letter a) of the said law, and the athlete was warned to Ufil:3 in the future only medicines prescribed by the sports physician. Against the decision of the Hearing Commission of Athletes and Athlete Support Personnel who infringed the anti-floping regulations, WADA submitted to ANAD a appeal on 13.11.2009 registere-d under No. 4343/13.11. 2009, requesting the admission of the appeal, the 1::ancellation of the challenged decision and, consequently, the suspension of athlete Murefian Mádálina Veronica for a period of two years starting from the date Gn which the decision of the Appeal Commission enters into force, the disqualificatir.m of ali results obtained in competitions starting from 6 June 2009 and until the commencement of the applicable períod of ineligibility, also requesting an award for costs. The appellant criticízes the decision issued because of the fact that the athlete did not prove how the prohibited substancH enterad her body, and, in arder for her to benefit from the eliminatíon of the suspemiion period for no fault or negligence, the athlete should have exercised utmost cautii:m in using the food supplement. In consideration of the aspects im,oked, the Appeal Commission establishes that, from the produced evidence, it res IJlts that the athlete did not use the substance to enhance the sport performance in I,er discipline, given that the athlete was the only athlete signed in for the category in which she competed within the competition, and, far the Fitness sport, for which stHfi competed, the bodily weight is not a selection criterion, the aesthetics and mwscle mass of the athlete's body being more appreciated, and the use of the foo-d supplement did not contribute to enhancing the sport performance, and, consequently, the athlete's intention in this respect cannot be

criterion, the aesthetics and mwscle mass of the athlete's body being more appreciated, and the use of the foo-d supplement did not contribute to enhancing the sport performance, and, consequently, the athlete's intention in this respect cannot be established. Moreover, the athlete and her coat,I1 declared that they purchased the "losing weight pill" from Piafar, a store specialized in selling natural products, and that the package of the product read that the product is u100% natural", and the leaflet accompanying the package did not contain any sign regarding the existence of any prohibited substance in the product's composi•!ion. The statements of the athlete and of her coach, made both befare the Hearing Commission of Athletes and Athletr:fi Support Personnel who infringed the anti-doping regulations, and before the Appeal Gommission, revea! that these "losing weight pills" were ingested by the athlete at the, recommendation of her coach, who also has the capacity as athlete, who, in her tun,, took such food supplement, and the results of the doping controls conducted in the period when she was using this product were negative. 3 Minlstarul Jlllllllel TraducllOr AIIIDrizat • Francez.i•E

SUR MINODORA-VASIUC Aut. nr. S280

CIF 2167046103/02 20 10 11 :21 0040 213115 541 ANA □ Thus, given that also the athlete':ficoach , i.e. her mentor, consumed the same supplement and the results of the d<:iping controls conduc ted in the last year were not positiva, significant negligence cannot be establíshed again st the athlete in respect of the violation of anti-doping rules, b1?.1caU$e another athlete/coach ingested the same fooct supp lement and the result was negative. The fact that the athlete purchased ·;he "losing weight pill s" from a Piafar store, which is assumed to sell natural products, corroborated with the fact that its package read

fooct supp lement and the result was negative. The fact that the athlete purchased ·;he "losing weight pill s" from a Piafar store, which is assumed to sell natural products, corroborated with the fact that its package read that the product is "1 00% natural", :fi1s well as the fact that she ingested these pills at the advice of her coach, who, in ht::r tum had used the same food supp lement, and the results of her doping controls wi;;fire not positiva confirms the idea that the athlete took caution measures in taking the 1respective product. The Appeal Comm ission assessefi¡; that athlete Murefian Madalina Veronica could have taken more caution measure1;; befare consuming such "losing weight píl ls", by direct inqu iries to the distributor r::1f the product and could have tested the food supplement to see its content, beini;i aware or having the obligation to be aware of the anti-doping regulations which estabílish the athlete's responsibili ty far any substance identified in his/her body. Moreover, according to the provisions of art. 21 of Law No. 227/2006 regardin g the prevention and fight against doping in sport, republished, she shoul d have specified her capac:-ity as athlete upon purchasing the respective product. The Appeal Comm ission establishms that this is the first violation of the anti-doping regulations by the athlete and that, as a result of the positiva result of the control of 06.0 6.2009, she no tonger particip;mted in any competition, including a week later, at the European championships for wh ich she was training. In consideration of the above, the Appeal Comm ission adm its in part the appeal filed by WADA and modifies Decision No. 8/04.08.2 009 of the Hearing Comm ission of Athletes and Athlete Support Per.!;;onnel who infringed the anti-doping regulations, replacing the measure of reprimant:l applied to athlete Madalina Veronica MURE fiAN,

by WADA and modifies Decision No. 8/04.08.2 009 of the Hearing Comm ission of Athletes and Athlete Support Per.!;;onnel who infringed the anti-doping regulations, replacing the measure of reprimant:l applied to athlete Madalina Veronica MURE fiAN, a member of Club Sportiv Muni cipE1 1 Baía Mare, with the appli cation of the sanction of suspension of the athlete from the !;port activity for a period of 1 (one) year from the date of taking her biological samplet.. In respect of the request for disquali fication of the results obtained by the athlete starting from 06.06.2009 and until i:he commencement of the suspension period, the Appeal Commi ssion shall order tlhe disquali fication of the results obtained if they occurred in the athlete's carrie,r, starting from 06.06.2009 and until the date of issu'ance of this decision, taking if'lto account that the athlete's suspension shall be ordered starting from the date of taking her biological sample. In respect of the request to compel the respondent to bear the costs incu rred by WADA far the submi ssion of the :appeal, the Appeal Commi ssion shall reject this 4 1' Ministt"'I Jusnt1ei radUC110r Aulorlzar • Fral'I0824.e-...anr• SUR MINODORA-VASIUCA Aut. nr. 52tiQ CIF 2187048103/02 20 10 11 :2 2 0040¿ l:.:ll lti tl41 l\l' HIU f/:::Ju.:iv í. VVO/ V I<. request, because the appellant did not prove any costs related to the submission of the appeal and did not submit in thi:;: file of the case any document in this respect and did not specjfy the amount of the cc:;:>ts.

request, because the appellant did not prove any costs related to the submission of the appeal and did not submit in thi:;: file of the case any document in this respect and did not specjfy the amount of the cc:;:>ts. In consideration af the provisions -of art. 37, art. 42 para. 3 of Law No. 227/2006 regarding the prevention and ftght rngainst doping in sport, republished, based on art. 30 letter a) of Order No. 47/2009, as subsequently amended, far the approval of the Regulation for organization and n¡:>eration of the Appeal Commission, the Appeal

Commission DECIDES: To admit in part the appeal filet:i by the World Anti-Doping Agency fiADA) on 13.1 1.2009 against Decision No. 8l04.08. 2009 of the Heijring Commission of Athietes and Athlete Support Personnel whn infringed the anti-doping regulations.

To modify Decision No. 8/04.08.:?.009 of the Hearing Commission of Athletes and Athlete Support Personnel who in fringed the anti-doping regulations, replacing the sanction of "reprimand" applied to athlete Madalina Veronica MUREfiAN, a member of Club Sportiv Municipal Baia Manfi, with her domicile in Baia Mare, str. Petru Rare§, No. 17 , entrance B, 4th floor, apt. :37, Maramurei¡ county, with the application of the sanction of "suspension of the athlete from the sport activity for a period of 1 (one) year from the date of taking her bic:i logical sample". The competitive results obtained by athlete Mure§an Madalina Veronica starting from 06.06.2009 and until the date of isHuance of this decision shall be disqualified, with all the consequences resulting from this fact, including foñeiture of any medals, points and prices, if they occurred in the i:fithlete's carrier. To reject WADA's request to compel respondent Mure§an Madálina Veronica to pay

the consequences resulting from this fact, including foñeiture of any medals, points and prices, if they occurred in the i:fithlete's carrier. To reject WADA's request to compel respondent Mure§an Madálina Veronica to pay the costs incurred by WADA for thn submission of the appeal. The decision of the Appeal Connmission may be challenged with the Court of Arbitration fer Sport in Lausanne v.-ithin 21 days from notification. This decision is binding. APPEAL COMMISSION For Drag01:1; Condrea - president Chairpert;on of the meeting signing Floarea Chivu megible signatura

Stamp: National Anti-..Ooping Agency, Appeal Commission

5 MiNSIOrul Juaa!lel

Tl1IOLICAIOI' AUlorilal • France21SUR IIINODORA•VASILICA

AIII. nr, S260

CIF 21870C8103/ 02 20 10 11 :2 2 00 402 13 11 5 541 AHAU n .... ..., ...,....., , . - - . , I, the undersigned SUR MINODORA-VASILICA, a certified translator with authoriiation no. 5260 issued by the Ministry of Justice, certify tl1 ·1fi exactness ofthe translation ofthe Rornanian document, Translator, 6