‘AIU’s evidence is at most circumstantial and grossly insufficient to prove the charge against me’: Oduduru wrote in his submission to the disciplinary panel

Divine Oduduru has promised to tell his side of the story following the six year ban he was handed by the Athletics Integrity Unit, AIU, in 2023 for ‘committing two anti-doping rule violations (ADRVs) of possession of prohibited substances and the attempted use of a prohibited substance or method.’

The Nigeria 200m record holder, who revealed he attempted to commit suicide four times following the trauma and depression he suffered following his ban, argued before the panel that found him guilty of committing the anti-doping rule violations that he was innocent.

The 2019 NCAA 100m/200m champion insisted the evidence used to convict him at the time was circumstantial as the prohibited substances were not found in his possession.

In fact, the disciplinary panel did not uphold the AIU’s charge against Oduduru of use of a prohibited substance or a prohibited method but was instead assumed the Nigerian had engaged in conduct that constituted a substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in the use of a prohibited substance and therefore upheld the attempted use charge.

At the core of the AIU’s case were Whatsapp messages between Blessing Okagbare and Eric Lira, which revealed Okagbare soliciting prohibited substances on Oduduru’s behalf, and photographic evidence of multiple prohibited substances discovered in Oduduru’s Florida apartment.

The prohibited substances found in Oduduru’s apartment were two boxes of Somatropin, ‘Xerendip’ and ‘Humatrope’, which were identified as human growth hormone; a plastic ziplock bag labelled ‘IGF LR3’ – an abbreviation for synthetic or ‘recombinant’ Insulin Growth Factor – containing three vials, and two boxes of recombinant erythropoietin (EPO).

According to testimony, one of the boxes of EPO was open and had only one of six vials remaining.

Also discovered in the apartment was an opened US Postal Service envelope containing ‘Xerendip’ – addressed to Okagbare and with Lira labelled as the sender.

‘The Panel finds it to be an extraordinary coincidence that all the prohibited substances found in the Oduduru’s apartment were precisely those requested from Mr. Lira by Ms. Okagbare for her and ‘Divine’, specifying that she had to give (to Divine) his stuff too and for which she tested positive (EPO and hGH),’ asserted the panel.

Given the Prohibited Substances found in Oduduru’s apartment, when and where they were found, and the fact that he had exclusive control of the apartment, the panel concluded that Oduduru was in constructive possession of the prohibited substances.

Oduduru however insisted he did not leave behind all the prohibited substances found in his apartment when he travelled out of his base in the United States to Europe (Samorin) in preparation for the Tokyo Olympics.

The Nigerian said he left behind the keys to his apartment for Individual-1 (name withheld) to assist him to move his belongings from his apartment to a storage facility.

According to the report on AIU’s website, Individual-1 was in Oduduru’s house on 12 and 13 July 2021 to move his belongings.

Oduduru further revealed he maintained phone communication with Individual-1 who did not inform him of any finding/discovering of the alleged prohibited substances and prohibited methods in his apartment.

Oduduru also stated in his submission that when the said individual-1 wrote him an email, he ‘did not mention or state that he found any prohibited substance(s) in his apartment.

The Nigerian argued that in all the evidence produced by the AIU, there is no direct evidence of his use of the alleged prohibited substances or attempted use of the same or of his being in possession of them.

He said there is no evidence that he ordered any of the prohibited substances alleged against him or that he requested for it from either Ms. Okagbare or Mr. Lira and denied knowledge of the prohibited substances in his witness statement.

Oduduru also stated that he did not use them and did not attempt to use any of it and he also did not test positive to any prohibited substance.

The available evidence shows that it was Ms. Okagbare who paid money to Mr. Lira.

Oduduru further argued that the test for ‘Attempted Use’ requires evidence of a voluntary act by him to purchase and use the prohibited substances. It is therefore not enough for AIU to rely on assumption or presumption to discharge the burden of proving to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel that he (Oduduru) committed an ADRV of attempted use.

He also argued that it is not enough for the AIU to rely on evidence of the alleged missing five vials of EPO that were not shown to have been supplied to or received completely by him or that the used bottles of the vials were found in his apartment to establish the ADRV for Attempted Use.