Doping is Much More Than the Presence of a Prohibited Substance in the Body

ENG

By Tatiana Mesquita Nunes

Brazilian State Lawyer. Former President of the Anti-Doping Sports Court in Brazil

I had the opportunity to speak at the opening of the first edition of the Sports Integrity Summit in 2019 about the three pillars of fair play from my perspective: clean play, fair play, and ethical play. The first is related to anti-doping, the second to the fight against match-fixing, and the third to good governance practices. 

That speech presented a fundamental principle: sports integrity is broader than just "cheating in competition." Cheating in other areas, in other dimensions of sports, is also cheating. Kicking the ball out of play to ensure that the first throw-in occurs within the first minute of the game to influence a sporting event on which certain people have placed bets may not change the outcome of the match, but it is cheating. 

The same applies to doping: it is not only the presence of a substance or its metabolites in the body—the result of a test conducted on the classic urine or blood sample—that is considered doping. Ten other violations, although unknown to some, are also considered cheating and, for this reason, should be equally sanctioned to ensure fair play. Let’s check them.

The classic behaviours of evading, refusing, or causing the failure of a doping test by any action or omission seem quite evident as violations since they prevent the very collection and are, therefore, violations in themselves, regardless of the discovery of the prohibited substance. 

Also, by expanding the scope of the rule to cover individuals beyond just the athlete, it addresses behaviours such as administering a prohibited substance, trafficking, and complicity from a third-party perspective. Regarding substance use, this constitutes a violation distinct from mere presence. Presence is characterised by test results, while use may be proven by other evidence, such as the athlete’s own declaration on the control form (which has occurred on multiple occasions). Along with use, possession is also a violation, involving the prohibited substance being found in the possession of the athlete or their support personnel. 

Less evident, however, are the last four violations, as they are less tied to the prohibited substance itself and more to other forms of "cheating" considered illegal by anti-doping legislation.

Firstly, there are two violations related to actions involving third parties. The first is the violation of prohibited association, which aims to prevent athletes from associating with individuals, such as coaches and medical professionals, who are serving suspensions for anti-doping violations. This rule protects athletes from potential "negative influences" and ensures that those who have committed violations adhere to their suspensions.     

The second violation, introduced in 2021, is acts of discouraging or retaliating against reporting to authorities. This violation aims to protect whistleblowers from being discouraged or retaliated against, ensuring that the anti-doping system has mechanisms to protect those who come forward to report violations.

Thirdly, the violation of location failures specifically addresses elite athletes who are required to provide their whereabouts for a one-hour time slot each day. Failure to comply with this requirement three times within a year can result in a suspension. This rule ensures the reliability of the system by preventing athletes from using supposed location failures to evade surprise tests that could detect prohibited substances in their bodies.

Finally, the violation of tampering involves any intentional conduct aimed at interfering with the doping control process in any way. This can include intentionally delaying the control process, manipulating samples during collection, or presenting false medical requests, among others. The violation occurs regardless of an adverse result, as the very act committed by the athlete undermines the integrity of the control process, making it unreliable. It is precisely this reliability that is sought by classifying such behaviour as a violation.

These violations highlight that doping is not just about the presence of a prohibited substance in an athlete's system. They underscore that any action compromising the integrity, fairness, and honesty of sports competitions is considered cheating and is punishable under anti-doping regulations. By addressing these various forms of cheating, anti-doping authorities ensure that sports are not only free from prohibited substances but also free from deceptive practices that could give athletes an unfair advantage.  

From the perspective of anti-doping, the integrity of sport can only be achieved with the effective participation of all stakeholders. Authorities must exercise regulatory vigilance, and athletes are expected to commit to ensuring fair play. Only in this way does the integrity equation close: with everyone involved in sport being aware, conscious, and acting in favour of fair play.

The views and opinions expressed in this op-ed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of GovRisk, its partners, or affiliates. Any content provided by our contributors is of their opinion and is not intended to malign any organisation, company, or individual.