Back
23 May 2025
The ITA reports that the athlete Mohamed Ahmed Farghaly has agreed¹ to the consequences imposed for his anti-doping rule violation (ADRV).
The athlete provided a sample on 19 March 2024 in Alexandria (Egypt) during an in-competition anti-doping control at the African Championships (Seniors, U20, U17). After analysis, the sample returned an adverse analytical finding for two prohibited substances – boldenone and 5-methylhexan-2-amine.2
Boldenone is banned in- and out-of-competition and is a non-specified prohibited substance under class S1.1 Anabolic Androgenic Steroids of the WADA Prohibited List. 5-methylhexan-2-amine (1,4-dimethylpentylamine) is banned in-competition only and is a specified prohibited substance under class S6. Stimulants of the WADA Prohibited List.
On 17 May 2024, when notified about the case, the athlete was provisionally suspended with immediate effect.3
The athlete did not challenge the ADRV and agreed with the consequences proposed by the ITA. Due to his early admission, the athlete was entitled to a one-year reduction of the otherwise four-year period of ineligibility imposed for an ADRV for the presence of a non-specified substance as set forth in article 10.8.1 of the UWW anti-doping rules.4 Accordingly, the case was resolved via an acceptance of consequences. The athlete’s period of ineligibility is from 17 May 2024 until 16 May 2027 and disqualification of competitive results from 19 March 2024 onwards.
The relevant stakeholders, namely the World Anti-Doping Agency and the Egypt National Anti-doping Organization, have a right to appeal the consequences imposed before the appeals division of the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
The ITA will not comment further on this case.
¹ Athletes have the right to choose not to have their case referred to a hearing panel. In these instances, the anti-doping organisation will assess the athlete’s case file and establish the applicable consequences pursuant to the anti-doping rules and the athlete will have the right to accept the proposed consequences. If the athlete refuses the proposed consequences, the case is transferred to a hearing panel. This resolution mechanism is provided for in articles 8.3.1 and 8.3.3 of the UWW anti-doping rules and 8.3 of the World Anti-Doping Code and is commonly referred to as an agreement on consequences and is deemed an UWW/ITA decision. The athlete’s National Anti-Doping Organisation and the World Anti-Doping Agency have the right to appeal the agreement on consequences before the competent appeal body.
² A report from a WADA-accredited laboratory that, consistent with the International Standard for Laboratories, establishes in a sample the presence of a prohibited substance or its metabolites or markers or evidence of the use of a prohibited method.
³ The information about the Provisional Suspension was publicly disclosed by the ITA shortly after its imposition: https://ita.sport/sanction/united-world-wrestling-uww/.
⁴ Article 10.8.1 of the UWW ADR (and World Anti-Doping Code) provides for a one-year reduction for certain ADRVs based on early admission and acceptance of sanction. This applies where an athlete, after being notified by UWW/ITA of a potential ADRV that carries an asserted period of Ineligibility of four (4) or more years, admits the violation and accepts the asserted period of Ineligibility no later than twenty (20) days after receiving notice of an ADRV charge. Where the athlete receives the one-year reduction under Article 10.8.1, no further reduction in the period of Ineligibility is allowed.
