The ZANEF committee met on 21st November 2016 at the Latitude Hotel, Lusaka.

Those present were:

Louise Henderson

Steve Rufus

Komari Holmes

Zara Nicolle – by Facetime to present the facts of the case and then she retired.

Lorian Nel – by Whats App call to Louise Henderson

Susanna Dakik – by Whats App to Clare Barkworth

Michelle Bousefield – Skype

Clare Barkworth – Skype

The only agenda item was the FEI Administrative Procedure case for use of a CONTROLED MEDICATION substance on the mare 13 year old Florida at the CSI* Event in Zimbabwe.

Zara presented her case as follows:

“

1Chris and I agreed to send my horse FLORIDA to Harare to compete in the CSI* with our daughter Maddy - we agreed she would travel with the driver and groom and stay with friends in Harare. I helped pack the medical box for the horses which included basic first aid treatments such as eye drops,betadine, thermometer, epsom salts, cotton wool and vet wrap etc. No phenylbutazone.

2I last saw the horse on Wednesday 10 August before we travelled to Namibia for an Eventing Stewards course - she was healthy.

3Maddy, Enock Mwale (driver) and Cliford Mulenga (groom) left for Harare with FLORIDA and KECHARA on Monday 15 August - leaving before Chris and I got back from Namibia. All arrived safely.

4FLORIDA was tested on Friday 19 August at 11am -she was chosen as a random sample (i.e. she was not in the line up). Rachel Howard (copied) signed for the samples as the person responsible for Maddy as Maddy is a minor.

5FLORIDA tested positive for a FEIprohibited substance; Phenylbutazone, a drug used to treat pain andinflammation - She had been given 5 X THE RECOMMENDED dose - apparentlyenough to cause damage to her internal organs

6I was sent the notification through the ZANEFemail via Clare Barkworth.

7Once we received the notification and after much deliberating and discussions with the legal department of FEI, I signed the Letter of Acceptance from the FEI and I agreed pay a CHF1000 fine - we felt we could not dispute the results.

Note: We decided not to do a B Sample test because her urine sample also came back positive AND we understood that she was the only horse tested on that day that produced a urine sample.

Fact: Florida has never been treated with phenylbutazone and is a remarkably healthy animal.

Fact: someone in harare administered phenylbutazone to my horse within 12 hours of the test - we know the time frame because of the levels of phenylbutazone and oxyphenbutazone (oxyphenbutazone is the metabolised form of phenylbutazone). Also the level of the substances detected suggest (but don’t confirm) it wasadministered via injection. The person who didadminister the substance knows who they are and if done innocently, foolishly or with malice perhaps one day they will confess.

FACT: We have learned it is genuinely worthupping the security for our horseswhen attending FEI Events. CCTV etc”

A letter from the Vet was also presented to the FEIand thecommittee. The Vet has administered veterinary services to Kiara Farm for 12 years, and vouched for horse management skills as exemplary. She described the Horse, Florida, as having no lameness issues and not a regular user of PHENYLBUTAZONE. (Letter attached).

Zara then retired from the meeting.

The committee accepted the presentation and the version of events, having no proof otherwise.

The committee members presented their views. These issues discussed were in summary:

1 How ZANEF handled the Issue:

Most of the committee members were angry that the matter had not been shared with the ZANEF committee at the time of receiving the FEI Notification. This made their situation untenable when later they were approached by members asking for clarification of a situation that they were unaware of. The Committee members felt side-lined. The committee members felt that if they had been informed, they would havewe had been united in the process in dealing this whole fiasco.

Clare explained that she was acting secretary at the time. She found the e mail from the FEI and forwarded it directly to Zara as the Person Responsible (PR) following FEI protocol. The PR is expected to deal directly with the FEI. Clare did not share the e mail with the committee. She assured the committee that she would have done the same for any Member in the same position, where a minor is concerned.

Clare visited Zara the next day and learnt that she was going to appeal.

Zara did not update Clare or any committee member on the progress of the appeal.

Clare did brief Lorian regarding the issue as it was to be on the agenda for the meeting of the 19th, which was the first meeting after the notification of the administrative procedure.

Generally it was agreed that it was badly handled. Committee members should have been informed immediately, kept informed by the PR of the progress of the appeal by the PR (also the Chairperson and the mother), and Membership informed of the outcome of the appeal.

2The meaning of the Administrative Procedure for a CONTROLLED medication was clarified.

The Membership needs to be educated as to what the Administrative Procedure for a controlled medication means. A controlled medication is NOT a BANNED substance. This does not mean that the FEI have banned this particular horse and rider from competing in other events but only that their scores from the event where the positive test results occurred no longer count towards any particular qualification.

There is no shame on the Federation for a Horse testing positive for Bute and has no bearing on the integrity of the PR.

In this case, it appears that the Horse was given 5 x the regular amount, which indicates possible interference from persons other than the PR ( who was not present at the event).

It was agreed that the welfare of the Horse was not intentionally jeopardised.

The FEI procedure was unbiased and fair.

3Way forward:

  1. What does this mean for ZANEF?
  2. In future, ZANEF committee will be shared ALL correspondence from FEI, whatever the content.
  3. Although there is no negative reflection on ZANEF as a federation, there is against the committee – lack of information and communication.
  4. It was suggested that a Disciplinary committee should be set up. This suggestion was not accepted. (see below 2).
  5. How does this affect Zara Nicolle as the Person Responsible (Maddy being a minor (under 18))?
  6. The Nicolle family will pay the substantial fine (CHF1000). This does not necessarily indicate an admission of guilt, but it is understood and accepted by the committee that it would be difficult for the PR to appeal due to the lack of evidence of any malicious doping.
  7. There will be no further action required from ZANEF. Likewise, the lack of evidence that the Horse was given Bute intentionally (and denial of the same and the past record as witnessed by the Vet) would preclude such an action. The committee agreed that there should be no further disciplinary actions against the rider or the PR.
  8. The committee that the Chairperson had not kept the committee informed which was a mistake. But she has done much for the sport over the years and it is hoped that this will be remembered.
  9. Education of the members – the meaning of Controlled versus Banned Substances.
  10. The Veterinary representative should be asked to draft an explanation of the difference between the Controlled and Banned substances.
  11. Education of members re young riders
  12. There are a number of young riders aiming to compete at FEI events. As a Federation, and parents, we must be in a position to guide and support them, ensuring that they are FULLY aware of all the issues related to banned and controlled substances, security, vet checks, and entries and vaccination requirements.

What is an “Administrative Procedure” case?

If a horse’s sample is positive for a Controlled Medication Substance that was not taken at the Olympic Games or FEI World Equestrian GamesTM, and it is the first violation for both the Person Responsible and the horse, the Person Responsible will be offered the opportunity to take advantage of the Administrative Procedure (sometimes referred to as “Fast Track”).This means that he may accept to pay a fine of CHF 1,500 and costs of CHF 1,000 (the costs may be increased to CHF 2,000 if a B Sample analysis is requested) and, at the same time, waive his right to a Final Hearing before the FEI Tribunal. Both the Person Responsible and the horse will be disqualified from the entire Event at which the sample was taken, which includes forfeiting any prize money or medals, but no ineligibility period (i.e. suspension) is imposed. The Administrative Procedure is offered as a benefit for first-time minor offences. The Person Responsible has no obligation to accept it and may always insist that his case be heard by the FEI Tribunal. If the Person Responsible does not choose the Administrative Procedure, the matter will be referred to the FEI Tribunal, which will apply the sanctions provided for in the EADCMR (this means that the Person Responsible may be suspended and/or fined).