The CAS reversed the decision in its entirety against 28 athletes, declaring that they did not have an anti-doping rule violation (see inset for a list of athletes). The appeals of another 11 athletes were partially satisfied: the court recognized their violation of anti-doping rules at the Sochi Olympics. The decision to deprive the Sochi medals (two gold medals in bobsleigh) remained in force, but the life-long disqualification was replaced by a suspension only from the next Games in Pyeongchang. The second list included bobsledders led by retired team leaders Alexander Zubkov and Alexei Voevoda, as well as three skiers and three hockey players. Consideration of the appeals of three athletes - also retired biathletes Olga Zaitseva, Olga Vilukhina and Yana Romanova (they won two silver medals in Sochi) - has been postponed and will be considered after the Olympics in Korea. Another athlete suspended on the basis of data from the Oswald Commission, bobsledder Maxim Belugin, did not appeal to CAS. Thus, the cases of almost all athletes who suffered in the course of the doping scandal after the Sochi Olympics were considered.
Why CAS overturned the IOC's decision
The reasons for the decision will be set out in the motivational part, which has not yet been published. The operative part of the judgment emphasizes that the evidence of anti-doping rule violations collected by the IOC and WADA in respect of 28 disqualified athletes is considered insufficient by CAS to impose sanctions on them. Following the release of the CAS verdict, the Olympic Committee issued a statement lamenting the IOC's "high CAS threshold for admitting the evidence presented". According to IOC officials, such an approach by the court could negatively affect the fight against doping, which is being waged by the IOC. After the publication of the reasoning part of the verdict, the IOC will consider the possibility of filing a cassation appeal with the Swiss Federal Tribunal.
But the decision of CAS is final, and the IOC can appeal to the Swiss Tribunal only violations of a procedural nature, if any, RBC explained. sports lawyer Mikhail Prokopets.
The CAS is the highest legal authority in sports. Sports arbitration The court was created in 1983 on the initiative of the ex-president of the IOC Juan Antonio Samaranch, its powers as the highest arbitration court in world sports are recognized by the IOC, sports federations and WADA. The Court, in particular, is empowered to overturn disciplinary sanctions approved by national and international federations up to the IOC.
What does the CAS verdict mean?
The reversal of the IOC's decision to disqualify Russian athletes means that they will be lifted from their lifetime ban from the Olympic Games, and the medals won in Sochi will be returned.
According to the results of the Games, Russian athletes took a confident first place, having won 33 medals (13 gold, 11 silver and nine bronze). However, after the decision of the IOC, the Russian team dropped to the fourth position in the overall standings with 20 medals (of which ten were gold), and Norway became the winner of the Games.
The return of the medals once again changes the alignment in the team standings of the 2014 Olympic Games. Nine awards will be returned to Russian athletes: two gold medals (skeletonist Alexander Tretyakov and skier Alexander Legkov), six silver medals (three in cross-country skiing, one in speed skating, two in luge) and one bronze medal (in skeleton).
Thus, Russia regains the final first place Sochi Games with 29 medals (11 gold, nine silver, nine bronze). Norway is back in second place - the Norwegians also have 11 gold medals, but the total number is less - 26 awards. In case of a positive decision regarding the biathletes, Russia will be able to return two more silver medals.
Who was acquitted by CAS
The CAS decision fully justified: bobsledders Dmitry Trunenkov, Alexei Negodailo, Olga Stulneva, Lyudmila Udobkina; skeletonists Alexander Tretyakov, Sergei Chudinov, Elena Nikitina, Olga Potylitsyna, Maria Orlova; skiers Alexander Legkov, Evgeny Belov, Maxim Vylegzhanin, Alexei Petukhov, Nikita Kryukov, Alexander Bessmertnykh, Evgenia Shapovalova, Natalya Matveeva; skaters Olga Fatkulina, Alexander Rumyantsev, Ivan Skobrev, Artem Kuznetsov; lugers Tatyana Ivanova, Albert Demchenko; hockey players Ekaterina Lebedeva, Ekaterina Pashkevich, Tatiana Burina, Anna Schukina, Ekaterina Smolentseva.
Will athletes be able to go to Pyeongchang
The decision of the CAS does not mean that the restored athletes will automatically enter the Olympics, Sergei Alekseev, head of the Sports Law Commission of the Association of Lawyers of Russia, emphasized in an interview with RBC. “There is no direct connection between the decision of the court and the invitation to the Olympics. This remains at the discretion of the IOC Commission,” he explained. According to Alekseev, acquitted athletes can file claims for the protection of honor and dignity, compensation for non-pecuniary damage in connection with inaccurate information from the IOC and the WADA commission.
Many of the restored athletes want and are ready to compete at the Olympics, Russian athletes' lawyer Artem Patsev told RBC. “They now think only about this, and we will deal with the protection of honor and dignity already clearly after the Olympic Games. Now it is urgent to enter into a dialogue with the IOC regarding the issuance of invitations to the guys, since the grounds for their removal have disappeared, ”the lawyer said. Sports Minister Pavel Kolobkov called the CAS decision "a triumph of justice" and said that the IOC, based on the court's verdict, should grant the acquitted athletes "an unconditional right to participate in the upcoming Olympic Games."
“Now the Russian Olympic Committee will send a letter to the IOC with a proposal that they declare our athletes to participate in the Games, and we will wait for the decision of the IOC. We really hope that the IOC will make a decision in favor of the athletes who have earned the right to participate in the Olympics,” said Kolobkov.
The IOC does not agree with this approach. The removal of disqualification from individual athletes does not mean the removal of disqualification from the Russian Olympic Committee. The Russian national team has been suspended from participation in the Olympic Games in Korea, and the decision on who to invite to the Olympics and who not remains in the competence of the IOC commission, which agreed on the list of invited Russians on January 27, the IOC said in a statement after the announcement of the CAS verdict.
In addition to the athletes acquitted by CAS, who appeared in the report of the Denis Oswald commission, the IOC did not agree on an invitation to the Olympics in Pyeongchang to several dozen more Olympians from Russia who had never appeared in doping scandals. In particular, the leaders of the national team - skier Sergei Ustyugov, skaters Ekaterina Shikhova and Denis Yuskov, biathlete Anton Shipulin and six-time Olympic champion in short track Viktor An - did not receive invitations. Officials of the Olympic Committee of their denial "the presence of the slightest suspicion" of involvement in the manipulation of doping. These athletes are preparing documents for submitting an application to CAS, a representative of the press service of the Ministry of Sports explained to RBC.
All athletes who are not allowed to participate in the Pyeongchang Olympics by decision of the IOC will be able to take part in alternative competitions that will be held in Sochi in parallel with the Korean Olympic Games. President Putin is already "based on the results of these competitions, to ensure bonuses in the amount of the Olympic Games." For an Olympic gold medal, the state pays an athlete a bonus of 4 million rubles. 500 athletes can take part in the "alternative Olympics".
The CAS decision enables Russian athletes' lawyers to continue their fight for the restoration of their rights in civil courts. A possible exclusion from the Olympics in Korea of athletes acquitted by CAS will also be challenged in the courts based on the CAS verdict.
On Thursday, February 1, Russian athletes will send requests to the IOC to receive an invitation to the Olympics in South Korea, Olympians lawyer Philip Burch told RBC. “We will request invitations today. The appeal process [to the CAS] was just for the purpose of getting decisions before the Olympics. Now the athletes are clean and should be invited,” he said.
Birch stressed that the IOC can either issue invitations or refuse invitations to 28 athletes. “If there is a refusal, then we will determine what further actions we will take,” the lawyer of the Olympians specified.
Minister of Sports Pavel Kolobkov did not rule out that a lawsuit could be filed with the court for the recovery of monetary compensation by Russian athletes for the damage caused to them by false accusations. “Athletes and lawyers will study this possibility, this cannot be ruled out,” he explained.
The CAS decision in favor of Russian athletes dealt a heavy blow to the IOC, sports lawyer Mikhail Prokopets told RBC. “This is very serious, given that the lives and careers of people are at stake. The CAS decision says that there is no evidence of the athletes' guilt. The IOC prepared these trials with such pathos, they had enough time to study the evidence, conduct all the necessary examinations, interrogate Grigory Rodchenkov and Richard McLaren, ”the lawyer noted.
Whether the IOC's arguments were "fantasies and conjectures", according to him, will become known after the publication of the reasoning part of the decision.
At the same time, the lawyer notes that not all the conclusions of the Oswald commission turned out to be unfounded, because "at least in relation to a third of the athletes, the accusations were nevertheless confirmed." Justified athletes, in his opinion, can recover moral and material damage from the IOC. “If they don’t make it to the Olympics or have already missed the commercial competition, you need to seek the truth in every possible way. Moreover, the state financially supports athletes in litigation, and it is necessary to try to restore the damaged reputation and compensate financial damage until the very end, ”Prokopets is sure. The amounts of penalties, according to him, depend on the legislation of the countries where the claims will be considered, and each specific case.
Who did CAS justify
In August 2016, ahead of Summer Games in Rio de Janeiro, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) took the side of Russian athletes in a dispute with the International Olympic Committee. The CAS did not agree with the IOC's criterion that previously doping athletes were not allowed to compete, even if they had served their ineligibility. The list of those who received permission to participate in the Games included, for example, swimmer Yulia Efimova, who eventually won two silver medals in Rio.
Also before the Games in Rio, CAS made a positive decision on the complaint of athlete Daria Klishina. First International Federation athletics allowed Klishina to compete, but later canceled this decision, citing new information on her case. CAS ended up with a Russian athlete in Rio.
In November 2017, sports arbitration acquitted Russian hockey player Danis Zaripov, whose doping sample contained banned pseudoephedrine, and reduced his suspension from two years to six months. The court found that the athlete did not use doping intentionally, but became a victim of an accident.
In January 2018, CAS refused to disqualify an American Olympic champion Rio 2016 running (4x100 relay) Gil Roberts for using banned probenecid. The athlete managed to prove that the drug entered his body through the kiss of a girl who used it as a cure for an infection.
DOPING
In the eyes of Russian fans, the Supreme Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne looks like a cold, cynical judicial body, initially hostile to Russian athletes who are accused of doping. However, on February 29, CAS fully acquitted cyclist Alexander Kolobnev, who proved his innocence. Sports lawyer Viktor BEREZOV, who was directly involved in the Kolobnev case, told SE why CAS acquitted a Russian athlete for the first time in its history.
KEYS TO SUCCESS
I, like you, cannot remember a doping case where the punishment of a Russian athlete for a positive test would have been reduced to a warning, - said Viktor Berezov. It was he who represented the interests of the Russian Cycling Federation (FVSR) in CAS, which issued a warning to Kolobnev, after which the International Cycling Union (UCI) challenged this decision of the Russian side.
Not so many high-profile cases involving Russians went through CAS. "The case of Lazutina/Danilova", "the case of Chepalova", "the case of Yuryeva/Akhatova/Yaroshenko", "the case of the seven", where the defendants were Russian athletes, - Berezov began to list, forgetting to mention only "the case of Kabaeva/Chashchina". - On the "seven" I just represented in CAS All-Russian Federation athletics. In the VFLA, athletes were given two years, in the IAAF they required four. CAS judged - 2 years and 9 months. Our term turned out to be closer than that of the IAAF, but it is cunning to consider that case won. Frankly, we went to Lausanne with one goal: to achieve such terms of disqualification so that the athletes could compete at the London Olympics. Fortunately, we succeeded.
- Each doping case is individual. But still, what does it take to win a CAS trial?
Speaking from the point of view of a lawyer, it is very important to forget how the courts are held in Russia. Because CAS has nothing to do with our judicial system. A textbook was the activity in Lausanne of the lawyer Kucherena in the "case of Lazutina / Danilova" in 2002. The first thing he did at the very beginning of the hearings was to challenge the entire composition of the court, including the arbitrator he himself had chosen. When he was denied this, the rhetoric familiar to many began - "a provocation against Russia", a "political conspiracy". But the way in which Kucherena could theoretically put pressure on the court in Russia is simply impossible in Lausanne. And as a result, the case, of course, was lost. Moreover, CAS went to the rarest principle for itself: in the final decision, Lazutin was obliged to pay 25 thousand Swiss francs in favor of the IOC for the defiant behavior of his representative.
CAS has adopted a much more democratic procedure for providing evidence than in Russia. We cannot, relatively speaking, simply print out a text from the Internet and present it as evidence. In CAS it is possible. In that, of course, the case when the other side does not protest.
Another feature of CAS is that everything is transparent from the very beginning. Before a certain time, you must disclose all your evidence, disclose the names of all witnesses and briefly outline their position and the essence of the information that they would like to convey to the court. Russian lawyers often prepare for something completely different. They write a statement of claim, and then wait for the trial, during which they pull new evidence out of their sleeves in order to confound the other side.
- Is CAS deliberately nullifying legal debate?
There is debate, but within certain limits. Any lawyer confronted with a mass of new evidence will immediately take time to prepare a response. The case is dragging on. There is no such thing in CAS. The parties arrive fully prepared for the hearing. And the CAS arbitrators themselves have the opportunity to get acquainted with the essence of the case, at least in general terms.
For almost 20 years of activity of the Supreme Sports Arbitration Court, it has considered a huge number of cases. And in one, two, five cases, you can definitely find similar moments. In general, studying CAS practice for a lawyer is the first key to success. For example, in the decision on the "Kolobnev case", CAS has references to about twenty decisions taken earlier by this court.
What about the other keys?
It is necessary to study the practice of specific arbitrators appointed to consider the case. We found a couple of decisions by the chairman of the jury, the Italian Luigi Fumagalli, and in our answer on the "Kolobnev case" we referred to him in advantageous moments for us. I think that any person is pleased when his decisions are known and referred to.
Together with Kolobnev and his lawyer Claude Ramoni, we chose one of the arbitrators according to CAS rules - American Jeffrey Benz. He was one of those who made the decision not to disqualify the Brazilian swimmer Cesar Ciela Filho, whose high-profile case to some extent set a precedent in CAS. And in the course of the meeting, Benz asked the UCI lawyer questions that made it clear that in the case of Kolobnev, he was not on the side of the international federation.
Finally, another key to success is fluency in English. From my own experience, I can assure you that not a single translator has an impeccable command of legal, sports, doping vocabulary. Therefore, coming to CAS with an interpreter for a lawyer means automatically lowering your chances.
At first, Russian lawyers came to CAS who did not know how to behave. The court's attitude towards them was clearly projected onto other Russian lawyers as well. When did the change in their perception occur?
It seems to me that this happened after 2004, when my immediate supervisor Alexandra Brilliantova (head of the legal department of the ROC. - Note. S.B.) became the CAS arbiter and we started attending meetings frequently. It was in 2004 that the first non-ping case won by Russia in CAS happened. Then the International Equestrian Federation incorrectly calculated its own rating, and instead of our girl (Alexandra Karelova. - Note. S.B.) others were admitted to the Athens Olympics.
The day before we flew to Athens, we filed an appeal, the day before the opening ceremony, it was considered at a meeting of the temporary CAS away team at the Olympics. The appeal was granted, and Karelova performed in Athens.
KOLOBNEV - A FIND FOR A LAWYER
Negative experience gained sports Russia in relations with CAS, he taught everyone to believe that since some international federation decides to sue a Russian athlete, then he does not have much chance. So it seemed in the Kolobnev case.
Federation of federations of strife. The IAAF, for example, uses the services of highly qualified British lawyers. And for all the time this federation lost, it seems, only one case. For the UCI, the "Kolobnev case" is also one of the few lost ones. But there are also examples to the contrary. The International Wrestling Federation, led by President Martinetti, regularly loses cases. Moreover, the mere intention to go to CAS can make FILA change its mind.
- How did Kolobnev behave from a legal point of view?
If you can imagine the ideal behavior of an athlete in such a situation, then this is the case. I just don't know what else he could have done. Alexander perfectly understood what his chances were and how to act. He spent a lot of money (presumably between 50 and 100 thousand dollars. - Note. S.B.), time and effort, and I'm humanly glad that it paid off. He was advised by a good lawyer - the Swiss Claude Ramoni, who worked just fine.
Kolobnev presented the FVSR at the hearings of the anti-doping commission (Berezov is one of its members. - Note. S.B.) all necessary explanations and evidence. As a result, the commission had little doubt when it issued a warning to Alexander, although such a decision for the federation is always a huge risk. And then, reading the decision of CAS, it was very pleasant to see on almost every page the phrase that the court fully agrees with the conclusions of the FVSR.
So, what explanations did Kolobnev give, who was found to have the diuretic hydrochlorothiazide at the Tour de France 2011, which can be used as a masking agent?
In the late 1990s, Kolobnev underwent two vein surgeries. Periodically, he was examined by his attending physician in Nizhny Novgorod, Sergei Petrov, who prescribed treatment for the racer, including the biologically active additives "Capilar" or "Capilarprotector". More often Kolobnev used "Capilar". The last time the rider visited Dr. Petrov was in 2009.
In June 2011, he came to the Russian Championship in Ufa. I went to the pharmacy network "36.6", asked "Kapilar". He was told that in the whole of Ufa in "36.6" there is no "Capilar", but there is a "Capilar protector". He bought it because he had previously used it.
Kolobnev took these supplements and brought them with him to the Tour de France, where he passed a positive test. The concentration of hydrochlorothiazide in the sample was so negligible that Kolobnev was able to obtain the conclusion of an extremely authoritative physician, Roland Rivier from Lausanne. The essence of the conclusion is that at this concentration hydrochlorothiazide has no masking effect at all.
Does anyone know how hydrochlorothiazide ended up in the supplement?
Most likely it's just a coincidence. It can be assumed that particles of another preparation containing hydrochlorothiazide remained in the production vat where "Capilarprotector" was prepared. The athlete does not have to prove exactly how it happened. He needs to prove how the substance got into the body, and for this he needs to know where this substance was contained. Kolobnev sent for examination to England all the dietary supplements that he had. The examination took about three months, and in the end, hydrochlorothiazide was found in Capilarprotector. The second condition for the athlete is to prove that the intake of the substance was not related to the goal of enhancing athletic performance. But here it was obvious! From that moment on, Kolobnev could build his position.
In fact, CAS quickly agreed that Kolobnev fulfilled these two conditions, and in the future, the degree of guilt of the athlete was simply determined. If we were talking about anabolics or EPO, then there would be little chance of avoiding a two-year disqualification. But hydrochlorothiazide is included in the list of "special substances", where the scope of punishment can vary from 0 to 24 months.
- What was the position of the International Cycling Union?
They believed that the degree of Kolobnev's guilt was the maximum. The main reason is that he did not have the right to change the additive, although Alexander did not change, but used both Capilar and Capilarprotector. The UCI also, in particular, disputed that Oleksandr bought Kapilarprotektor in June 2011 in Ufa. But Kolobnev did not go to the pharmacy alone, but with his wife and nanny. The wife acted as a witness, CAS reacted to this absolutely normally. They decided not to interrogate the nanny at all.
Who else was a witness?
Kolobnev's Katyusha teammates in July 2011 Yegor Silin and Yuri Trofimov. Doctor Petrov. Roland Rivier. The court had problems with video communication, so we spoke with witnesses by phone.
- At the end of the hearings, was it already possible to draw any conclusions about the position of the court?
It's impossible. In CAS, everyone is always emphatically friendly, but in most cases it ends badly. Confidence that we have a good position - yes. Deep down, we, including Kolobnev himself, agreed to a 3-month disqualification, but a complete acquittal came as a surprise to everyone.
Why did the UCI decide to go to court against Kolobnev? Were they sure they were right or was it a purely fashion decision?
I think image. The warning issued to Kolobnev by the FVSR became for international union challenge. Their position is an irreconcilable fight against doping, and it was important for them not to let things go on the brakes, but to indicate their position, and then, they say, let CAS figure it out. And further. If in the case of the “Contador case”, in addition to the UCI, the decision of the Spanish federation was also challenged by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), then he had no complaints against Kolobnev. Apparently, they did not want to join the case, the chances of winning which looked unfavorable.
Sergey BUTOV
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Similar Documents
Arbitration decision: essence, meaning and main features. The legal force of judgments, their types and features. Adoption, announcement and appeal of decisions of the arbitration court. The study of its activities in the process of consideration and resolution of the case.
term paper, added 07/07/2014
The concept and types of judicial acts of the arbitration court. Requirements for the decision of the arbitral tribunal. Determination of the arbitration court (form and content). Features of proceedings in cases related to the execution of judicial acts of arbitration courts.
test, added 06/26/2012
The concepts of court decisions and requirements, the definition of the essence of a court decision. Legitimacy, validity, motivation of decisions of the arbitration court. Analysis of the requirements for the decision of the arbitration court as an act of protection of the violated right.
thesis, added 06/20/2010
Law Analysis Russian Federation on the amendment to the Constitution of February 5, 2014 N 2-FKZ "On the Supreme Court and the Prosecutor's Office". Consideration of the main problems arising in the process of unification of the Supreme Arbitration Court and the Supreme Court of the state.
abstract, added 06/02/2014
Characteristics of justice in the field of entrepreneurial and other economic activities. Consideration of the stages of the arbitration process. The study of the powers of the arbitration court in enforcement proceedings. Imposition of a fine for failure to appear in court.
test, added 11/25/2015
The concept and types of acts of arbitration courts in the Russian Federation. Essence, meaning, order of making its decision. The legal force of the decision of the arbitral tribunal. Its content and basic requirements for it. Correction of shortcomings of the decision of the arbitration court.
abstract, added 11/13/2013
The history of arbitration courts in Russia, the structure of the arbitration court, the competence of the arbitration court, innovations in arbitration legislation. Legislation on arbitration courts. Improving the arbitration judicial system.
term paper, added 06/27/2003
The main news that not only our athletes, but also fans, and even people who are far from sports have been waiting for, came today from the International Court of Arbitration. He fully justified 28 Russians, whom the IOC had previously suspended for life from the Olympics, deprived of the medals won in Sochi. Among them are our titled skiers Alexander Legkov and Maxim Vylegzhanin, skeletonists Alexander Tretyakov and Elena Nikitina, speed skater Olga Fatkulina. Sanctions were partially lifted from 11 more athletes: the life suspension was replaced by inadmissibility only for the next Olympics in South Korea. But will those who now have no complaints be able to go there? It's not all that simple here.
The Lausanne Court of Arbitration for Sport announced its decision in Pyeongchang. From today, for the duration of the Olympics, its mobile branch is starting to work there, which will consider the cases of athletes in an accelerated mode.
“The appeal is upheld. Sanctions canceled” – this line from the press release of the court means that most of our athletes accused by the IOC of manipulating doping samples are acquitted.
“In 28 cases, it was determined that the evidence collected was not sufficient to establish that the athletes had indeed committed anti-doping rule violations. We satisfied the appeals of 28 athletes, lifted their sanctions and restored their results of the 2014 Games in Sochi,” said CAS Secretary General Matthew Reeb.
Thus, the court did not accept the arguments of the IOC, which back in 2016 created two commissions that studied the data of Richard McLaren's investigation into doping in Russian sports. One of the commissions under the leadership of Denis Oswald was engaged in rechecking the doping samples of the participants in the Sochi Olympics. As a result, the IOC announced a life-long suspension from the Games of dozens of our athletes. 39 of them filed suits with the Court of Arbitration for Sport. To date, 28 people have won cases.
Press Secretary of the President of Russia Dmitry Peskov said that the issue of the participation of justified Russian athletes in the games in South Korea will be discussed with the International Olympic Committee. According to him, Russia "will continue the peaceful legal battle for the interests of our athletes." And the Prime Minister of Russia said the same thing today at a government meeting.
“We never doubted that our athletes absolutely deservedly received all those medals that were won in Sochi. It is good that the court fully confirmed this, proved their purity. This is very important from the point of view of the future of the athletes themselves and from the point of view of organizing work in elite sports in our country. It is necessary that fully rehabilitated athletes be able to take advantage of all the opportunities that are open to them as a result of this court decision. And we wish all our athletes great success at the Olympics in Korea,” Dmitry Medvedev said.
Sports lawyers consider the decision of the arbitration court only the beginning of a long journey to fully justify our athletes and the entire Russian team, which the IOC forced to compete at the Games in Korea not under the national flag.
“The guys who participate in the competitions themselves are, of course, ready and want to participate in the Olympic Games. Another thing is that back in January, the IOC repeatedly expressed its position, which boils down to the fact that the IOC does not see a direct connection between the issuance of invitations to Olympic Games with the result of the proceedings on these complaints,” said sports lawyer Artem Patsev.
The reaction of the IOC itself to the decision of the court was predictable. The International Olympic Committee has already stated that it still does not consider our athletes innocent and does not exclude the possibility of continuing trials already in the Swiss tribunal.
“The CAS decision does not mean that 28 athletes will be invited to the Games. The absence of sanctions does not automatically confer the privilege of an invitation. In this context, it is also important to note that at his press conference, the CAS Secretary General insisted that the court's decision "does not mean that these 28 athletes are declared innocent," said International Olympic Committee spokesman Mark Adams.
Nevertheless, our athletes, who have never been seen in violation of anti-doping rules, whose accusation was based only on the testimony of one witness who fled to the United States, the former head of the Russian Anti-Doping Laboratory, Grigory Rodchenkov, do not hide their joy from such a decision of the Swiss Arbitration Court of Sport.
“Of course, I am very happy, glad that CAS made such a decision, that he listened to us, accepted our arguments, our facts and sorted out the situation. Because I have been returned Olympic medal in Sochi, my honest name. This is very important to me and I'm glad. I don’t know how the IOC will continue to act,” says skeletonist Alexander Tretyakov.
“That's probably all, this is the business of life, what I do. And when you are accused like that, it is, of course, very unpleasant, and everything collapses for you, and the road to the upcoming main starts is closed. Now it's all back to square one. Let's hope that we will still get to these Olympic Games,” said Elena Nikitina, bronze medalist of the 2014 Olympic Games in skeleton.
Alexander Tretyakov, the IOC is obliged to return gold medal Sochi Games, his colleague Elena Nikitina - "bronze", and skier Nikita Kryukov - "silver".
“I am very glad that all this slander that poured on us, on me, she nevertheless stepped aside, and our best Olympic Games in Sochi, which were in 2014, and the country won, after all, we they proved to everyone that these were fair and correct games, ”said the athlete.
Thus, after the court decision, Russia regained not only the entire Olympic podium at the 50-kilometer ski race in Sochi, but also the first place in the unofficial team event of the 2014 Olympics, which the IOC tried so hard to deprive our country of.
On Thursday, the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne upheld the appeals of Russian athletes who were disqualified for life by Denis Oswald's commission. 28 athletes were fully justified, for 11 the ban applies only to the upcoming winter Olympics in Pyeongchang. More than ten taken Sochi medals will remain with the owners.
Nevertheless, this is no triumph - it is rather a manifestation of common sense. Guilty, yes, definitely. But the punishment in no case should be collective, including individual "punishment on suspicion." What's more, it's for life.
Behind the positive decision of the Court of Arbitration for Sport is a multi-layered and complex story. It is possible that the clarification will basically come down to the motive "due to insufficient evidence", as has happened before and that did not prevent the "doping case" from developing according to the worst-case scenario. There are reasons to throw hats up and shout that all the bad things are behind us and now we have to deal with the punishment of all enemies, real and imaginary, as they never were, and are not.
Obviously, the competent work of the hired Swiss lawyers influenced the verdict. It is possible that another sensational story by the German ARD channel journalist Hajo Seppelt also played a role - in the harsh formulations of the main person involved in the IOC vs. Russia case, Grigory Rodchenkov, about the total Russian doping system sanctioned from the very top, there was a clear overkill. The hint that the author was almost on a short footing with Putin only added skepticism in relation to the large-scale revelations of a fugitive specialist.
The President of the Russian Federation, who had not spoken before about the latest events with the removal of Russian athletes, finally broke the silence. At the send-off of the Olympic delegation from the lips of Vladimir Putin, an unexpected “I apologize” sounded. He, of course, confessed to the athletes for the fact that they "failed to protect them from unprecedented pressure from outside." But if desired, the remark could be interpreted more broadly. On the occasion of his main electorate, who advocated a boycott of the Olympics, the president did not go. Although the decision, I believe, was not easy for him.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport sharply moved against the IOC, rehabilitating almost all Sochi triumphs - the winner of the ski marathon Alexander Legkov, the owner of three silver awards Maxim Vylegzhanin, the "gold" skeletonist Alexander Tretyakov, the silver medalist skater Olga Fatkulina and their other colleagues.
Back in early December, when the fateful decisions were being made, the head of the organization, Thomas Bach, warned that the “Efimova case” would not happen again. Let me remind you that the previously suspended swimmer was admitted to the 2016 Games after she won the case in the arbitration court. But the final decision then depended on the international sports federations, to which the IOC delegated authority. And now the IOC itself decided the fate, approving the option with personal invitations - with which the Russian side also agreed.
Now the situation can develop in different ways. If the IOC bites the bit, none of those who get a chance will end up in Pyeongchang. He will take into account the verdict, which he is obliged to obey in form - he can drag out the case for a week, and then it will be too late, on February 9 the opening of the Games. A partial admission option is also possible, but much depends on quotas - some of the previously suspended Russians did not fulfill the qualification standards, someone did not have the opportunity to fulfill them, and in general, all the freed quotas have already been transferred to other delegations. The decision will also depend on the reaction of the international sports community, as well as on specific participants in the Olympics who are already flying to Pyeongchang. And among them, not everyone will approve such a sharp turn - at first, WADA and the IOC seemed to convince the Russians of the guilt, and now they suddenly forgave them.
If the rehabilitated are invited, then a phantasmagoric situation will arise - in Pyeongchang, those previously disqualified for life, and not invited “on suspicion”, as well as for past sins, will be able to perform, the leaders of the Russian team will remain outside the Olympics. The first category includes Pavel Kulizhnikov, Denis Yuskov and others, the second - Viktor An, Anton Shipulin, Sergey Ustyugov. There are an order of magnitude more candidates for the Pyeongchang gold on these lists than on the “list of 28”.
So, with all the joy for the athletes, I would wait a little with euphoria - the prospects are too unclear, and there was too little time for the realization of completely extinguished hopes. On federal TV channels they are already shouting about a big political victory, which seems to be much more important than a sports one.
But to one and to the other - even as to the moon.
The IOC said it would challenge the decisions for all 28 athletes.
