A decision has been issued by the Disciplinary and Appeals Tribunal in the case of World Athletics (WA) against Mohamed Katir, a 26-year-old Spanish middle-distance runner. Mr Katir was serving a two (2) year period of Ineligibility for breaching an Anti-Doping Rule Violation (ADRV). This sanction followed Mr Katir's admission to breaching Rule 2.4 of the 2024 Anti-Doping Rules (ADR) due to the commission of three (3) recorded Whereabouts Failures, which occurred on 29 February 2023, 3 April 2023, and 10 October 2023.
Following a further review of the Travel Itinerary, Boarding Pass, and Booking Confirmation Mr Katir had originally submitted to explain the Whereabouts Failure of 28 February 2023, the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) had cause to consider that those documents had been falsified/manipulated.
After the AIU issued Mr Katir with a Notice of Allegation on 18 March 2024 and following a meeting with the AIU on 3 April 2024 in which Mr Katir admitted to falsifying/manipulating the documents, the AIU issued Mr Katir with a Notice of Charge on 12 June 2024, for a breach of Rule 2.5 Tampering or Alleged Tampering with any part of the Doping Control process, (i.e., in connection with Results Management, specifically, the pre-adjudication phase of Results Management (ISRM) for the Whereabouts Failure on 28 February 2023).
Mr Katir requested a determination by the Disciplinary and Appeals Tribunal through a hearing conducted in accordance with Rule 8.
The Disciplinary and Appeals Tribunal was comprised of Charles Hollander as the Sole Arbitrator.
A hearing in this matter was held on 29 November 2024. During the hearing, the Athlete's representative contended that it was unjust for Mr Katir to face a second penalty related to an ADRV for which he was already serving a two-year suspension. He further criticised the AIU for failing to detect at the outset that the documents had been doctored. Mr Katir’s representative also argued that due to exceptional circumstances as outlined in Rule 10.3 of the 2024 ADR, a reduced sanction should apply, or alternatively, that there were grounds to justify a lesser period of suspension.
The Disciplinary Tribunal dismissed the arguments presented by Mr Katir’s representative. He noted that the Athlete had admitted to presenting a false version of events and had submitted altered documents in an attempt to persuade the AIU that his Filing Failure on 28 February 2023 should not be classified as a Whereabouts Failure. He further ruled that the argument criticising the AIU for not detecting the dishonesty earlier implied that a more successful deception would lead to greater benefit for the perpetrator. This, he stated, is an untenable position and cannot be accepted as a valid argument in defence of someone who deliberately sought to deceive the AIU.
Further, the Disciplinary Tribunal determined that the two (2) year period of Ineligibility imposed for Mr Katir’s breach of Rule 2.4 was based on the assumption that the Athlete had acted honestly. In contrast, the current Charge, pursuant to Rule 2.5, was fundamentally different in nature. There would also be no unfairness to Mr Katir, as any proven violation of Rule 2.5 would be considered part of a single (first) ADRV for sanctioning purposes. This would result in a sanction running concurrently with the existing Rule 2.4 period of Ineligibility.
The AIU sought to extend the ban by one (1) year due to aggravating factors, including the severity of the offense and the concealed nature of the deception. However, the Disciplinary Tribunal found no grounds to increase the sanction beyond four (4) years. The decision on a sanction was based on the fact that (i) the deception had no impact, (ii) Mr Katir admitted to Tampering, and (iii) this Charge was in relation to a first Whereabouts Failure.
The Disciplinary Tribunal determined that an ADRV had been established under Rule 2.5 of the 2024 ADR. Consequently, a period of Ineligibility of four (4) years was imposed, running concurrently with the existing suspension. Mr Katir’s period of Ineligibility will therefore commence from the date of the decision (11 November 2024) and will expire on 7 February 2028, factoring in the 308 days already served for the ADRV under Rule 2.4. There was no Disqualification of any medals, titles, points, prize money and prizes obtained by the Athlete prior to 7 February 2024.
Sport Resolutions is the independent secretariat to the World Athletics Disciplinary and Appeals Tribunal.
A copy of the full decision can be accessed via the related links tab on the right-hand side.
