Ashcroft v Powerlifting Australia and Sport Integrity Australia

A member of Powerlifting Australia challenged an imposed sanction of four years’ ineligibility and disqualification of her results for the presence, use and possession of prohibited substances.

The athlete returned an Adverse Analytical Findings (AAF) for Exogenous Testosterone, Androsterone, Etiocholanolone and 5β- androstane-3α, 17β-diol from an in-competition doping control test in October 2017. In February 2018, the athlete returned a second AAF for Exogeneous Androsterone, Etiocholanolone and 5β- androstane-3α, 17β-diolfrom in an out-of-competition doping control test.

The athlete did not dispute that she had committed the asserted Anti-Doping Rule Violations. However, the athlete sought a reduction in the sanction on the basis of ‘no significant fault or negligence’ and ‘prompt admission’.

The Tribunal found there was no occasion for a reduction in the sanction on the basis of ‘no significant fault or negligence’ based on the evidence adduced. In relation to the application for a reduction in sanction for ‘prompt admission’ it was noted that the Tribunal does not have the power to reduce the period of ineligibility under Article 10.6.3 of Powerlifting Australia’s Anti-Doping Policy unless the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) or Sport Integrity Australia approves such a reduction. Irrespective, the Tribunal found there was no basis upon the evidence before it that prompt admissions had been made.

It was therefore determined that a period of four years’ ineligibility be imposed on the athlete, commencing 21 March 2018, and that her competition results dating from 23 September 2016 to the date of the determination be disqualified.