Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Sisu West Ranch" <ranch@xxxxxxxxxxx>

> I have not been deligently following FEI drug testing lately, so excuse this
> question if the answer has been published to death.
>
> What drug residue was found in the horse?  I ask this because there are
> different classifications of drugs and the seriousness of the offense of
> being caught with them.

 

They just say that it was a "Medication Class A" violation.

 

This case never reached the Hearing Tribunal or Appeal stage

because the "Person Responsible" agreed to admit the violation

and be dealt with administratively (which is evidently what they

mean when they say "Fast Track").  The December list of people

with administrative sanctions--that includes Zakah Zahara and

Mubarak Khalifa bin Shafya--is at:

 

http://www.fei.org/athletes_and_horses/medication_control_and_antidoping/Documents/TableofAdministrativeSanctions21.12.07.pdf

 

Note that this is *different* from the sanctions page that Leonard

has been pointing to (it's that thing on Leonard's link

under "Table").

 

As to why he didn't get a higher penalty.  The June 2007

rules give two "outs":

 

  - The penalty for a Class A first violation is

    *up to* a year's ineligibility and/or *up to*

    CHF (whatever that is) 15,000.

    "Up To" of course includes zero.

    [Paragraph 10.2]

 

  - More likely it was [Paragraph 10.5.1:  Elimination of

    Reduction of a Period of Ineligibility Based on

    Exceptional Circumstances]:  Note that it says

    "shall be eliminated"  It doesn't say "may be

    eliminated."

   

10.5.1 If the Person Responsible establishes in an individual case

involving a rule violation under Article 2.1 (presence of a Prohibited

Substance) or Use of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method

under Article 2.2 that he or she bears No Fault and No Negligence for

the violation, the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility and other

sanctions shall be eliminated. When a Prohibited Substance is

detected in a Horse’s Sample in violation of Article 2.1 (presence of a

Prohibited Substance), the Person Responsible must also establish how

the Prohibited Substance entered the Horse’s system in order to have

the period of Ineligibility and other sanctions eliminated. In the event

this Article is applied and the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable

and other sanctions are eliminated, the rule violation shall not be

considered a violation for the limited purpose of determining the

period of Ineligibility for multiple violations under Article 10.1, 10.2,

10.3 and 10.6.

 

The definition of "No Fault and No Negligence" is given elsewhere.

Note that the last sentence also means that this violation, if this paragraph

was indeed invoked, won't even count as a first offense.

 

To see the whole drugging rules, see: 

http://www.fei.org/Athletes_AND_Horses/Medication_Control_AND_Antidoping/Horses/Documents/EADMCRules1steditionupdatedandeffective1June2007.pdf

I don't see anything that compels FEI to give any details about anything.

Maybe that's part of the way they reward you when you don't contest

a finding.

 

I'm still confused about the "major competition" statement.  That may

be something that gets invoked under the other three sets of rules!

 

Linda Marins