The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has released its full decision document from the high-profile Sun Yang case, in which the Chinese Olympic champ was ruled ineligible for eight years over a September 2018 doping test.
You can read the full 78-page CAS decision document here.
The 2018 incident revolved around Sun’s challenge of the credentials of doping control officials. Sun ultimately refused to provide a urine sample, and instructed his security guard to destroy a vial of blood he’d already given. An independent anti-doping panel originally cleared Sun of wrongdoing through FINA’s investigative process, but an appeal by the World Anti-Doping Agency led to the 8-year ban.
A few notable pieces of the full decision:
CAS pointed out significant differences in the accounts of Sun and his doctor, Ba Zhen, about the rationale for Sun’s behavior on the night in question. The CAS document doesn’t entirely throw out Dr. Ba’s testimony, but considers it “not a complete or adequate account of the events that occurred.”
The CAS panel found that Sun’s actions, in principle, obstructed the established collection process. CAS held that there are cases where an athlete can object to the typical doping control procedure, but that those are only in “the most exceptional circumstance.”
Sun’s case made a distinction between two types of authorizing documents. Sun contended that doping control officials needed a generic letter of authority (from a body like FINA or WADA, authorizing a testing company like IDTM to conduct a test) along with a specific letter authorizing the specific doping control agents by name. CAS accepted the distinction, but held that the generic letter of authority, combined with the tester’s ID, showing her affiliation with IDTM, was sufficient for both parts.
CAS also noted that Sun did not testify that a specific authorization letter had been shown to him in any other doping control test he had undergone without protest in years past.
The decision documents claims that during the hearing, Sun did not express regret as to his actions, but that “he dug his heels in and, eventually, sought to blame others for the manifest failings that occurred.”
Sun’s specific violation in this case would carry a four-year period of ineligibility, but since it is Sun’s second anti-doping violation, the sentence is doubled. The new WADA Code, which doesn’t take effect until January 2021, would actually allow the sentence to be reduced back to four years, but that Code isn’t yet in effect. Once it does take effect, though, Sun could apply to have his sentence reduced.
hammer down, CAS.
I read through the 78 page document. I consider it the least biased recap of everything related to this. In actuality, Swimswam and Xinhuanet aren’t that biased in that they hit the key facts of what happened but the way each article is written can make a reader’s emotions swing one way or another. I suspect that’s why there has been a polarizing comment section on this issue for the past year.
The conclusion just feels a little off. They accept that the DCA took pictures and that this was inappropriate, and that he should have been removed and that the urine sample couldn’t be collected. They accept that it was reasonable to re-visit the documentation provided by the DCO, DCA and BCA at this point.
Their finding regarding the DCA is weird. He submitted a statement saying he was just a classmate of the DCO and was not serving as a DCA on that night and had received no training. But the panel seems to have ignored this and instead relied on the statement of confidentiality he signed previously. Are they suspecting his later statement was under threat of intimidation? The… Read more »
“It all seems murky, Sun Yang is relying on WADA regulations but CAS is ruling that WADA regulations don’t apply.”
So in your understanding which WADA regulation were disregarded?
Section iii) (items 255 – 293) talk about the roles involved and the credentials they are required to show. In section 265 they reference that the WADA code requires chaperones (the title DCA doesn’t appear in the WADA code but is understood to be an equivalent role to chaperone) to provide documentation from the Testing Authority; but the DCA admittedly only provided his government ID.
They are claiming that the DCA’s inclusion in the Authorisation Letter is sufficient; which might not be in line with WADA’s Guidelines but is in line with ISTI (272).
The Authorisation Letter is where the DCA signed off that he had received training from the DCO and understood his responsibilities, but I don’t… Read more »
Only the DCO needs personal identification documents and the single authorisation letter covers both DCO and Chaperone:
Chaperone’s are often volunteers and they need not be pre-trained but can be trained on the spot so the role must not require a high level of skill:
Source: https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/WADA_Guidelines_Urine_Sample_Collection_v5.1_EN.pdf
Yup looks like you’re right. But there remains some uncertainty about the authorization letter based on the DCA’s later statement saying that he received no training (even if we accept that it is pretty basic).
Regardless it seems like poor guidance and an overreaction from Sun’s camp; but it just ends up feeling like a harsh punishment when it seems like there was some reasonable grounds for suspicion that IDTM wasn’t acting totally professionally.
Yes-for item 276-278 it seems that CAS jumps to the conclusion that earlier signature made by DCA is reliable than written statement saying “No one had ever trained me regarding doping test, and it was not necessary for me to accept any training as I was only a builder.” Especially considering that both conflicting statements are made by DCA, why not have DCA clarify this rather than just taking one statement over another?
exactly, especially that DCA informed CAS that he could testify in in this arbitration 3 days before the arbitration. But his offer was rejected by CAS for no clear reasons. Later CAS rejected his written statement only for the reason that it came later. This is not reasonable at all, time is not a basis for truth. I thinks this would be a ground for Sun’s later appeal.
Now if we could only ban FINA for a few years.
Start with Cornel and his cronies.
Sun Yang’ team made a huge mistake. But I am also shocked that IDTM Drug Control Officer(DCO) brought her untrained high school classmate to help this test and this is considered to be OK. No concern that guy could sabotage the test? Feel this whole thing is like a joke!
How does someone sabotage observing someone pee in a bottle? That’s the extent of their role.
That is a good question. How could this guy be trusted by either side without a certification? We know he was a fan of Sun Yang. Isn’t it possible that he could cover up if there was really a drug violation? Or isn’t it possible the sample could be swapped by him in the process if he wanted to sabotage? The stake was so high. Don’t feel the way it was handled was all right.
I’m gonna quote some paragraphs from the WADA urine collection manual that seem relevant.
“From this point, the Sample collection vessel shall be handled only by the
Athlete unless the Athlete authorizes the DCO/Chaperone or the Athlete
Representative to handle the vessel on his/her behalf. Such authorization
must be documented. ”
So the chaperone need never handle the sample so would have a difficult time sabotaging or swapping it.
“In the case of a team which includes Chaperones with no experience, the DCO
shall train the Chaperones on-site. Such training shall include the
requirements for notification, chaperoning and witnessing Sample provision, as
well as confidentiality obligations (see Appendix 1 for Chaperone Training
Guidelines).… Read more »
I am not arguing about what the rules are. I just don’t think it is a good idea to involve un-certified people in such a highly sensitive situation. Can you imagine a bank would hire an armored truck guard without a rigorous background checking process? In this world, there are just a lot of unreasonable rules.
But, the DCA gave a written statement, saying “No one had ever trained me regarding doping test.” If this is true, it’s in directly contradiction to WADA rules. The CAS simply ignore this eveidence and also reject the DCA’s demand of giving testament in person. This is not fair for Sun, I think.
Wait a second, this may be surprising only to me since I couldn’t be bothered to read every document related to this case, but this whole time the linchpin of Sun’s defense, that the tester didn’t have ID on them, was complete bogus!?!?!?!
The tester had ID showing they represented an agency that was authorized to take the test, what more did Sun want? He threw his career away over nothing! Just go ask Mo Farah, if you don’t want to take a test you can just hide in your bathroom for an hour! Hell even if you’re missing your third test of the year you can still get away with it if you are a big enough star… Read more »
The DCO (Lead Doping Control Officer) did have it. Sun Yang thought that the assistant needed it too (when the testing protocol actually doesn’t require it). Combine that with the DCA being excited to be seeing sun yang that they took photos-> Sun yang found out and thought this to be unprofessional and questioned the validity of DCA->Sun yang thinks entire test is void-> Sun Yang destroys samples.
My opinion: a lot of this was an unlucky combination of things on him but I think his ego doesn’t help him when he’s actually in the wrong. I think the fact that FINA has misinterpreted this means that the letter of the law isn’t as clear as it could be and… Read more »
you hate to see it
Talking about his doctor, I like how CAS placed him in a corner with some common sense questions during the hearing. Reminder that it was his fault for not being updated with the new WADA drug list in 2014 and not suspending Sun’s use of trimediazine. I also remember CAS saying to the doctor something like:
‘You were not aware and failed as a doctor in 2014, causing harm to your athlete. How can you be so sure to order your athlete to destroy samples and to avoid the test when in the past you already failed to be fully aware of the situation? Have you ever thought about IF…. IF I am wrong now… what can my athlete face?’… Read more »
Same doctor was till now Sun team.
so where’s the ban for the doctor?
They banned him for a year or so a while ago and he didn’t care… He was found on the deck working during the ban. He got banned ‘harder’ then. I can’t remember all the facts now. I don’t know what will happen to this guy but one thing is for sure, by following the whole CAS saga, I concluded that Sun Yang has a team of delusional, ‘above the law’ and yes men around him. As soon as his team told him the test was illegal, you can imagine what goes in the head of someone like Sun. He would destroy the sample even if he had to eat it.
Isn’t it a violation to work with a banned coach?
Sun will prevail.
…on the golf course maybe
…or in successfully growing a second nose (his first one grew just like Pinocchio’s…fell right off of his face!)
He can go on Lance’s podcast…
Or in chinese bot land