Ethiopian marathon runner Ruti Aga banned six years over prohibited substance and tampering

The Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU) has banned Ethiopian marathon runner Ruti Aga for six years. The AIU announced the ban on Thursday, according to The Guardian and Reuters.

The ban relates to the prohibited substance methylprednisolone and to tampering. The two outlets describe the charges slightly differently. Reuters describes them as presence or use of the substance and tampering with evidence. The Guardian describes them as use of the substance and tampering with the anti-doping process.

Aga won the 2019 Tokyo Marathon.

Both outlets attribute their reports to the AIU on Thursday. Both report the ban, the substance, the tampering charge and Aga's 2019 Tokyo Marathon win. The Reuters item reviewed by Vocemundi was a short summary. The further details below come from The Guardian alone.

According to The Guardian, the AIU said Aga tested positive for methylprednisolone after winning a half-marathon in China in March. The Guardian reports that the six-year ban is made up of two parts: two years for use of the substance and four years for tampering.

According to The Guardian, the AIU said Aga did not respond to the charges. As a result, the ban was issued without a hearing.

The Guardian reports that Aga is 32 years old. It also reports that she has finished on the podium at the Berlin and New York marathons.

What each side says

• Ruti Aga: According to The Guardian, Aga said a doctor in Ethiopia gave her the substance to treat knee pain.
• Athletics Integrity Unit: According to The Guardian, the AIU said its investigation found that the clinic named on the prescription Aga submitted did not exist. The AIU also found that the supposed prescription had been signed by a family member who was not a registered doctor. The Guardian reports that Aga was then charged with use of the substance and "tampering" with the anti-doping process, but does not explicitly state that the tampering charge relates to the prescription.

What the reports do not say

The reports reviewed by Vocemundi do not quote the AIU's statement or decision directly beyond a single word. They do not include any response from Aga or her representatives to the ban or to the AIU's findings about the prescription. They do not say whether Aga can appeal or intends to, for example to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. They do not give the start date of the ban. They do not say whether any results or prizes will be disqualified or forfeited, including the half-marathon win in China. They do not name that race or give its exact date. They do not identify the family member or the clinic named on the prescription.

Analysis

The case is notable because most of the ban, four of six years according to The Guardian, relates to tampering rather than to the substance itself. This suggests that, in the AIU's assessment, the tampering weighed more heavily than the positive test; The Guardian reports the charge after describing the prescription findings, though it does not explicitly link the two. Several questions remain open. Aga could challenge the decision, or she may not; the reports do not say. The status of her past results and prizes is also unclear. Any further statement from Aga, her representatives or the AIU could clarify how the ban will be applied.

Produced by the Vocemundi newsroom with AI assistance.