Due to the verdict after a decade, Polukhin's individual results from the event -- including one gold and two silver medals -- have been disqualified. He was found guilty of doping which had escaped detection for years because of the Russian conspiracy.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
The charges arose from investigations by the IPC into the evidence provided by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) about the state-sponsored doping programme in Russian sports between (at least) 2012 and 2015. During that time period, the Moscow and Sochi laboratories utilised a \u2018Disappearing Positive Methodology\u2019 to conceal presumptive adverse analytical findings and, at the Sochi 2014 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games, swapped out \u2018dirty\u2019 urine samples for \u2018clean\u2019 urine obtained from athletes for that purpose.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
On March 7, 2023, the IPC charged the athlete with the Use of a Prohibited Method (specifically, tampering by way of urine substitution) in breach of Article 2.2 of the 2011 IPC Anti-Doping Code.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
The athlete admitted using trimetazidine (TMZ) out-of-competition in February 2014 (which was permitted at that time) but denied knowledge of or participation in any sample swapping in March 2014. A hearing was held before the IPC\u2019s Independent Anti-Doping Tribunal, the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) informed in a statement on Thursday.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
Based on the detailed scientific and factual evidence presented by the IPC, the Independent Tribunal found that:<\/p>\r\n\r\n
1. In 2014 a state-sponsored doping scheme existed in Russia, but the Sochi laboratory was not expecting to have to swap samples for the Sochi 2014 Paralympic Winter Games (as it had done for the Olympic Winter Games Sochi 2014). Therefore, the Sochi laboratory did not possess a clean urine bank for Russian Paralympic athletes (as it had for Russian Olympic athletes).<\/p>\r\n\r\n
2. During the Paralympic Winter Games, the Sochi laboratory detected presumptive adverse analytical findings for TMZ in the samples of several Russian Para cross-country skiers and biathletes (including the athlete). Analysis of the samples was stopped, and the samples were reported negative by the Anti-Doping Administration and Management System (ADAMS).<\/p>\r\n\r\n
However, because the samples would be placed in long-term storage for possible reanalysis, the Russian authorities knew there was a risk that if the samples were later re-analyzed, the TMZ findings and the cover-up would be discovered. To eliminate that risk, the \u2018dirty\u2019 urine inside the sample bottles was thrown away and replaced with \u2018clean\u2019 urine.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
In the athlete\u2019s case, forensic analysis of the sample bottle showed scratches and marks and a urine residue tooth mark that could only have been caused by someone closing, re-opening, and then reclosing the sample bottle.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
Analysis conducted in 2018 of the urine in the bottle at that time demonstrated that the composition of the urine had changed since the 2014 analysis by the Sochi laboratory. DNA analysis confirmed that the urine swapped into the bottle was a DNA match for the athlete.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
According to the Independent Tribunal, there was \u2018no other reason\u2019 to re-open the sample bottles \u2018other than to swap the urine\u2019 and the athlete must have \u2018actively cooperated in the provision of clean urine to the Russian authorities for the purpose of Sample swapping\u2019 to facilitate that.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
The athlete did not provide \u2018any logical or plausible explanation\u2019 for the evidence of sample swapping with his urine, and \u2018there is simply no other logical explanation\u2019.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
The Independent Tribunal upheld the anti-doping violation charge. As the violation arose during Games time, the rules required the Independent Tribunal to determine the consequences of the violation in relation to the Sochi 2014 Paralympic Winter Games only.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
All other consequences for the violation (including the applicable period of ineligibility) will be determined in due course by the International Ski and Snowboard Federation (FIS) and the International Biathlon Union (IBU).<\/p>\r\n\r\n
The Independent Tribunal found that the athlete\u2019s conduct during the Sochi 2014 Paralympic Winter Games was \u2018particularly egregious\u2019 and \u2018significantly undermined the integrity of the event\u2019.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
In accordance with 2011 IPC Anti-Doping Code Articles 9 and 10.1, the Independent Tribunal disqualified all of the athlete\u2019s individual results from Sochi 2014. As a result, the athlete will forfeit his gold medal from the Men\u2019s Para biathlon 15km Visually Impaired competition, his silver medal from the Men\u2019s Para biathlon 7.5km Visually Impaired competition, and his silver medal in the Men\u2019s Para biathlon 12.5km Visually Impaired competition.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
The athlete initially filed an appeal against the decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport, but the appeal was deemed withdrawn in March 2025 after the athlete failed to pay the advance of costs.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
Jude Ellis, the IPC\u2019s Head of Anti-Doping, said: \u201cAfter the publication of the 2016 McLaren Report into state-sponsored doping in Russia, the IPC investigated several highly complex cases related to Russian athletes who competed at the Sochi 2014 Paralympic Winter Games.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
\u201cDue to the extremely unique nature of these cases - with no positive samples available to call upon as is usual in anti-doping cases - gathering sufficient scientific and factual evidence to meet the threshold to charge an athlete with an anti-doping violation has been difficult.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
\u201cFollowing analysis of a huge amount of data obtained through WADA investigations, Nikolay Polukhin\u2019s case met the evidential threshold to charge the athlete with an anti-doping rule violation. The resolution of this case draws a line under what has been a long-running process into potential anti-doping rule violations by Russian athletes at the Sochi 2014 Paralympic Winter Games.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
\u201cThe IPC is grateful to WADA for the support received during this long process,\u201d Jude Ellis said.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
\u201cFollowing analysis of a huge amount of data obtained through WADA investigations, Nikolay Polukhin\u2019s case met the evidential threshold to charge the athlete with an anti-doping rule violation. The resolution of this case draws a line under what has been a long-running process into potential anti-doping rule violations by Russian athletes at the Sochi 2014 Paralympic Winter Games.<\/p>\r\n\r\n
Also Read: <\/b> Highest tax paying cricketers<\/a><\/p>\r\n\r\n