557. According to an agreement reached by the Parties, the individual hearing of the Athlete was held as follows: introductory remarks on behalf of the Athlete, examination of the Athlete in direct, cross-examination, questions by the Panel, examination in re-direct and re-cross, and pleadings on behalf of the Athlete and by the Respondent.
1. Testimony of the Athlete
558. The Athlete filed a witness statement dated 16 January 2018 in support of her appeal. In that witness statement, the Athlete summarised some of the major achievements in her sporting career and noted that she has never been informed of a positive doping test result, whether in Russia or abroad.
559. The Athlete went on to describe the process that was followed in respect of her doping control test at the Sochi Games, which she said was “conducted as usual and in line with the applicable anti-doping regulations”. Among other matters, the Athlete said she could remember that after filling the sample collection bottles, she “fully closed the bottles until they clicked, to the maximum extent possible”, before passing the bottles to the DCO, who “checked that they were properly closed to the maximum extent possible”.
560. The Athlete denied that she had ever committed any wrongdoing. In particular, she denied:
Communicating the bottle numbers of her sample to anyone.
Having any personal contact with Dr. Rodchenkov or any other personnel at the Sochi and Moscow laboratories.
Being acquainted with Ms. Rodionova, or ever having met her.
Being part of any anti-doping programme, consuming any prohibited substances, or collecting or freezing clean urine outside of regular protocols (or receiving instructions to do so).
Not fully completing her DCF.
561. The Athlete further stated that she had suffered “heavy moral and financial damage” as a result of the IOC DC’s decision.
562. The Athlete gave oral evidence in person at the hearing. During her oral testimony the Athlete confirmed and, in some respects, expanded upon the contents of her witness statement. The Athlete described the doping control tests at the Sochi Games, which she said went according to normal procedure. She stated that she closed the bottles to the full extent possible as she always did, in the presence of the DCO. She said that she did not have a mobile phone with her during the testing procedures and that she did not take a picture of her DCF. She confirmed that she did not know and has not heard of Ms. Rodionova.
563. She also insisted that that no one ever instructed her to rinse her mouth out with a particular substance, nor had she observed any member of the Women’s Ice Hockey Team doing so;
and that she had never provided any clean urine for a urine bank or outside of doping and medical checks.
564. She did not have an explanation for the presence or the level of sodium in her sample. She denied having engaged in any wrongdoing and did not consider herself to be at fault. She had been shocked by the IOC DC’s decision, which caused her to lose her hobby, her job and the most important thing in her life, and that she never had taken prohibited substances and never had expected to be accused of such.
565. During cross-examination, the Athlete stated among other things that:
She was accompanied to the doping control station by the team doctor, Dr.
Kondrashin. She did not have an explanation why Dr. Kondrashin allegedly expressed particular concern that she would test positive for a prohibited substance. She stated that Dr. Kondrashin had never given her or her teammates anything to ingest or take orally that was unknown or that could have been a prohibited substance, nor did he give her any nutritional supplements.
She had no explanation for the high level of sodium in her sample and did not know if she ate a particularly large amount of salt.
During the Sochi Games, she ate the usual food on offer at the Olympic Village.
When she left the doping control station, she kept her DCF with her.
566. Upon questioning from the Panel, she again stated that she had no explanation for the sodium level in her sample and that the doping control test had been normal. She further confirmed that she had not taken any nutritional supplements. After some clarification of the translation of questions relating to nutritional supplements, the Athlete stated that: (a) in terms of nutritional supplements, she had taken vitamins dissolved in water; and (b) whenever she took medication, it was because she was ill and following doctors’ orders.
2. Closing statements related to the Athlete a. The Athlete
567. It was submitted on the Appellant’s behalf that:
She had been sanctioned, first and foremost, as a result of the allegations made by Dr.
Rodchenkov in his affidavit. However, the diary extracts “do not confirm anything with respect to the allegations that were made against Ms Skiba”, and were in some respects a bit misleading.
She had done “everything correctly”, and had confirmed that she had not taken the Duchess Cocktail, had closed the bottles to the fullest extent possible and did not provide any urine outside of doping tests.
The “relatively high” level of sodium in one of her samples was “at the high range but … not physiologically impossible”.
Although she had no explanation for this sodium reading, she was “not at fault” and could not be sanctioned “simply because the level of salt is high in her sample”.
There was no link between the alleged ADRV and the Athlete.
There was no proof that the Athlete had: (a) taken the Duchess Cocktail; or (b) had anything to do with any alleged tampering with her sample.
b. The Respondent
568. The Respondent, in its brief closing statement, submitted that:
The forensic evidence was the “real reason why Ms Skiba is on the stand today”, as opposed reliance on the testimony of Dr. Rodchenkov.
Her sample had been found to contain a high level of sodium of nearly 400 mmol/l, which even the Athlete’s expert admitted was “implausible”.
In actual fact, having regard to the median value for women, “we are really above the level of plausibility here”, which “means that this sample was swapped”.
Dr. Rodchenkov’s evidence regarding the Russian Women’s Ice Hockey Team was consistent with this forensic evidence.
No fewer than eight members of the Women’s Ice Hockey Team had been “found with strong evidence, direct evidence of swapping”, which again “indicates that something happened in this team, consisting in doping practices conducted at the team level”.
The evidence against the Athlete was “compelling”.