Admin l Saturday, February 19, 2022
LAUSANNE – The Anti-Doping Division of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS ADD) has disqualified British sprinter Chijindu Ujah as well as the British 4X100 sprint relay team over anti-doping rule violation at the Tokyo Olympic Games 2020.
Chijindu Ujah, a British athlete is consequently sanctioned with the disqualification of his results in the 4 x 100m sprint relay Final on 6 August 2021, and his results in the 100m sprint – together with the forfeiture of any medals, diplomas, points and prizes in accordance with Article 10.1 of the IOC Anti-Doping Rules for the Tokyo Olympic Games 2020.
In addition, the Great Britain men’s sprint relay team results in the 4 x 100m sprint relay Final on 6 August 2021 are disqualified together with the forfeiture of any medals, diplomas, points and prizes in accordance with Article 11.3 of the IOC Anti-Doping Rules for the Tokyo Olympic Games 2020.
World Athletics (WA) is requested to consider any further action within its own jurisdiction andpursuant to its own Rules including the determination of any period of ineligibility.
On 6 August 2021, following the Final of the 4x100m sprint relay, the Athlete underwent an in-competition doping control. Analysis of his sample returned an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) for the prohibited substances enobosarm (ostarine) and S-23, Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators (SARMS) which are prohibited by WADA at all times. On 12 August 2021, the International Testing Agency (ITA), acting on behalf of the IOC, formally notified the Athlete of the AAF and he was provisionally suspended by the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU).
The Bsample analysis requested by the Athlete confirmed the A-sample analysis and the ITA referred the matter to the CAS ADD for determination on the ADRV and the imposition of consequences under the IOC ADR.
Following an exchange of written submissions in which the Athlete did not challenge the ADRV but argued that he had not knowingly or intentionally doped, suggesting that the source of the prohibited substances could have been the ingestion of a contaminated supplement, the CAS ADD Sole Arbitrator issued the present decision in which she determined, to her comfortable satisfaction, that an ADRV had been committed by the Athlete contrary to Article 2.1 of the IOC ADR.
