The Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS) will be hearing the Waliyeva doping case behind closed doors from Tuesday. International athlete representatives fear backroom deals.
Even before the lawyers meet to finally decide on the fate of Russian figure skating hope Kamila Valiyeva, the pressure is growing. Starting next Tuesday, the doping trial surrounding the young star who tested positive for the doping drug trimetazidine will take place in Lausanne before the CAS World Sports Court.
Three days are initially planned for the spectacular procedure, Friday can be added at short notice. The accused athlete Valiyeva herself, now 17 years old, will not travel from Russia, but will only be connected via video, as will those responsible at the Russian anti-doping agency RUSADA.
The procedure takes place non-publicly. The request of American athletes who wanted to be allowed to listen in Lausanne was rejected. At the Olympics in Beijing they were affected by the fact that Valiyeva was allowed to compete despite a positive doping test. “Why doesn’t CAS allow for an open and transparent process so that justice can be served?”says the general director of the athletes’ association Global Athlete, Rob Koehler, angrily “These athletes have the most to lose, they should be allowed to listen so there can be no backroom deals.”
“Jurisprudence delayed, justice denied”
It is unclear how long it will take the three CAS arbitrators to agree on a verdict after up to four days of hearings. What is certain is that the process is viewed with suspicion around the world: in Russia they fear that their young hopeful could be used as a scapegoat. In many other countries around the world, the CAS and the International Olympic Committee that founded it are already criticized for being overly Russia-friendly.
“On the whole, justice is being delayed and justice is being denied.”complains Koehler, once a high-ranking employee of the World Anti-Doping Agency, “The IOC and all other stakeholders have constantly kowtowed to Russia. The CAS watered down the WADA sanctions and also allowed Valiyeva to continue competing after her positive doping test.”
The subject of the proceedings are applications from the World Figure Skating Association ISU and the World Anti-Doping Agency WADA. They want Valiyeva to be banned for four years for a doping offense and, like RUSADA itself, are challenging the decision of the RUSADA Anti-Doping Commission. Last December, this body recognized Valiyeva’s positive doping test as a doping violation, but claimed that Valiyeva had “without fault or negligence” traded. That’s why the RUSADA Anti-Doping Commission decided not to impose a ban.
The Valiyeva case had a heavy impact on the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing. At a time when, after systematic state doping, the Russians were only allowed to compete as neutral athletes and their sports bosses were fighting to restore full national rights, the Russian Valiyeva’s doping case overshadowed the games in China.
The lessons from the Pechstein case
The fact that the evaluation of the urine sample taken by Valiyeva, a potential medalist, at the Russian Championships on December 25, 2021, was only completed and made public almost two months later during the Olympic Games, which caused criticism. Valiyeva had tested positive for the banned heart drug trimetazidine.
Because the drug can increase blood flow and therefore endurance, it was placed on the WADA banned list in 2014. Valiyeva’s defense strategy was based on the fact that she had probably drunk from a glass that her sick grandfather had allegedly previously used for the heart medicine he used.
The CAS decision is ultimately binding. In its press release on the proceedings, the court simply refers to the parties’ possibility of resolving the arbitration award “limited procedural reasons”i.e. formal violations, not substantive reviews, to bring the case to the Swiss Federal Court within 30 days.
However, the CAS arbitrator that Valiyeva’s side chose for the proceedings could already indicate that the legal scope could go beyond this and be exploited: The Paris professor of public law, Mathieu Maisonneuve, has repeatedly written in essays the fight of the German speed skater Claudia Pechstein through the courts and before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
Hardly any athlete before Pechstein had demonstrated to the CAS in such a painful way that its jurisdiction – contrary to its omnipotence self-image – does not have to be the measure of all things. Pechstein’s lawyers succeeded in having their CAS proceedings reviewed not only in Strasbourg, but also in German courts.
This enabled them to have the highest court declare that the statutes of the CAS violated the European Convention on Human Rights. And they ultimately successfully lodged an appeal with the Federal Constitutional Court: This overturned a – actually final – instance ruling by the Federal Court of Justice.