NADA seeks four-year ban against sprinter Ansah following refused doping control

Possible participation in Birmingham

NADA is receiving support from investigative journalist Hajo Seppelt, who has been dealing with doping in international sport for years. In a statement, Seppelt said: "Allerdings ist nach meinem Kenntnisstand der Athlet in der Situation genau und mündlich wie schriftlich darüber informiert worden, welche Konsequenzen bis hin zu einer mehrjährigen Sperre eine verweigerte Dopingkontrolle nach sich ziehen würde". This contradicts the account that Ansah was unaware of the implications of his actions.

It had previously been reported from the HSV athlete's circle that Ansah had not fully grasped the consequences of refusing a control. This account is called into question by Seppelt's statement, according to which the track and field athlete had been informed both verbally and in writing about possible sanctions.

Legal basis for the ban

NADA is following the regulations of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) in its application, which stipulate a minimum ban of four years for a refused control. A shorter sanction is only possible in justified exceptional cases, for instance if the athlete can prove that his culpability was minimal or that special circumstances existed.

Should the arbitration court grant NADA's application, Owen Ansah would be ruled out of competing at the 2028 Olympic Games in Los Angeles. By then, the sprinter would also have to surrender all competition results from the period in question, which would significantly impact his sporting record.

Impact on his sporting career

The national anti-doping agencies are networked internationally and work closely with WADA in Montreal and the relevant bodies in Monaco, where the international athletics federation is based. This cooperation is intended to ensure that doping-related offences are pursued consistently.

There has so far been no official statement from the German athletics scene regarding the ongoing proceedings. The German Athletics Association (DLV) declined to comment on the pending case when asked. The final decision on the ban now lies with the arbitration court, which will hear the case in the coming weeks.