Back
7 May 2026
The ITA confirms that the athlete Nurlan Rasulov has agreed¹ to the consequences imposed for his anti-doping rule violation (ADRV).
The athlete tested positive for the exogenous origin of testosterone, androsterone, etiocholanolone and adiol(s), as well as boldenone and its metabolite following two doping controls conducted out‑of‑competition on 24 October 2025 and in-competition on 2 November 2025 at the 2025 European Junior and U23 Championships in Durrës, Albania, respectively.
These substances are listed under class S1.1 Anabolic Androgenic Steroids of the World Anti‑Doping Agency (WADA) Prohibited List. They are prohibited at all times (in‑ and out‑of‑competition) and are classified as non‑specified substances. These substances have potent muscle-building and strength-increasing properties.
On 28 November 2025, when notified of the case, the athlete was provisionally suspended with immediate effect.²
The athlete did not challenge the ADRV and agreed with the consequences that apply under the IWF anti-doping rules as proposed by the ITA. Accordingly, the case was resolved via an acceptance of consequences.
Due to his early admission of the ADRV, the athlete was entitled to a one-year reduction of the applicable period of ineligibility as set forth in article 10.8.1 of the IWF anti-doping rules.³
The period of ineligibility, which was increased to five years on the basis of aggravating circumstances,⁴ is effective from 28 November 2025 until 27 November 2030. Additionally, all the athlete’s individual competitive results, including those obtained at the 2025 European Junior and U23 Championships in Durrës, Albania, are disqualified from the date of the first sample collection (24 October 2025) until the date of the provisional suspension (28 November 2025).
The decision may be challenged before the appeals division of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) by the parties with a right of appeal in accordance with Article 13.2.3 of the IWF anti‑doping rules.
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 IWF 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 IWF/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 The information about the provisional suspension was publicly disclosed by the ITA shortly after its imposition: https://ita.sport/news/the-ita-notifies-weightlifter-nurlan-rasulov-of-an-apparent-anti-doping-rule-violation/.
³ Article 10.8.1 of the IWF anti-doping rules (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 IWF/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 of the IWF anti-doping rules, no further reduction in the period of Ineligibility is allowed.
⁴ As per article 10.4 of the IWF ADR, if aggravating circumstances are present which justify the imposition of a period of ineligibility greater than the standard sanction, the period of ineligibility otherwise applicable shall be increased by an additional period of ineligibility of up to two years depending on the seriousness of the violation and the nature of the aggravating circumstances. The circumstances and actions that qualify as aggravating circumstances include, but are not limited to, circumstances where the athlete used or possessed multiple prohibited substances or prohibited methods.
