This is the official statement from the Bahamas Anti-Doping Commission (BADC), with respect to the Doping Violation committed by track athlete, Trevorano Mackey.
Mr. Mackey participated at the BAAA Nationals, held in Freeport, Grand Bahama on June 22nd 2013. In the lead-up to the actual meet, he was one of a number of athletes who were selected for sample collection and random testing as a part of the BADC’s program for testing of athletes at national and international events.
We received notification of an “adverse analytical finding” from our Lab in Montreal, Canada with regard to Mr. Mackey’s “A” sample on July 19, 2013. Mr. Mackey was notified of this finding and advised of his right to have his “B” sample also analyzed, in the event he felt that the results of the A sample analysis was incorrect. Mr. Mackey requested the further analysis, which he was required to pay for and the “B” sample was subsequently analyzed.
On August 22, 2013 the BADC received a second adverse analytical finding following the analysis of the “B” sample. This confirmed the results of the “A” sample and the matter was then forwarded to the Bahamas Anti-Doping Commission’s Disciplinary Panel for a hearing. Mr. Mackey was found to have tested positive for the substance “Nandrolone”.
The Disciplinary Committee met on October 21, 2013 and after hearing submissions from Mr. Mackey and his representatives concluded that:
“it is our view that the applicant (Mr. Mackey) has failed to establish that there was a departure from the International Standard of the conduct of sample analysis which could have caused an Adverse Analytical finding to rebut the presumption of the accuracy of the relevant findings. That being so, we find that the Applicant is in violation of an Anti-doping Rule under Article 2.1 of the Rules.”
With respect to sanctioning, the Panel recommended that the Applicant be reprimanded and that no further period of ineligibility from future events should be imposed.
Once a copy of the report from the Disciplinary Panel was submitted to the Bahamas Anti-Doping Commission, questions were raised by BADC about the level of sanctioning, particularly since the Rules contained provisions for a minimum suspension of two years in cases when athletes test positive for substances on the WADA banned list. An appeal was, therefore, lodged by BADC with the Caribbean Regional Anti-Doping Organization, since there was no local Appeals Tribunal in place at the time.
Upon review of the submission from BADC, the Caribbean RADO concluded that it had no jurisdiction to hear the matter, since the Bahamas Anti-Doping in Sports Act provides for such appeals to be heard by a Local Appeals Tribunal.
Subsequent to this, the BADC then appealed to WADA, which responded as follows:
“We have carefully reviewed the case of Mr. Mackey in light of the decision rendered by the RADO Disciplinary Panel and it seems that there would not be any possible recourse for BADC against the decision rendered by its Disciplinary Panel or by the RADO. We would advise BADC to take note of the various comments made about the decision in the course of the review process and would further encourage BADC to work as quickly as possible on the creation of its National Appeals Tribunal. This would indeed prevent future potential appeals from having to go to CAS”.
Steps are being taken to have a local Appeals Tribunal ratified by the Minister of Sports. The previous Appeals Tribunal was disbanded with the resignation of certain key members at the end of its first year of existence.
In view of the above, the BADC now considers this matter closed.
Bahamas Anti-Doping Commission