Jannik Sinner is facing a crucial moment in his career as he prepares to appear before the CAS once again regarding his doping case. The three-time Grand Slam champion tested positive for two samples of clostebol back in March 2024, but the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) concluded that there was "no fault or negligence" on the player's part, sparing him from a suspension.
However, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) announced a month later that it would appeal, seeking a sanction for the Italian. As a result, Sinner will now face a ruling from the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), an independent tribunal set to make a decision between April 16 and 17.
For now, Sinner remains active on the ATP Tour without restrictions. He began the season by winning his third major title at the Australian Open after defeating Alexander Zverev in the final. He withdrew from this week's ABN AMRO Open in Rotterdam but is set to compete in the Qatar Open next week, followed by Indian Wells and the Miami Open in March.
In April, the last tournament Sinner could play without issues would be Monte Carlo. If he receives a suspension, it could take effect starting the week of the Madrid Open.
Ahead of Sinner’s CAS hearing, former CAS judge and lawyer Angelo Cascella spoke to the Italian outlet L’identità about the situation. “It is clear that a prohibited substance was found in the athlete’s body. There is no question about Sinner’s good faith. However, WADA is requesting a suspension of one to two years due to negligence, as the athlete is also responsible for the actions of his team.”
“The fact that the doping quantity did not enhance Sinner’s performance does not matter in terms of disqualification. If an anabolic steroid is banned and found in an athlete’s body, it is an objective finding, and he could be sanctioned,” the sports law expert added.
“Unless circumstances like those of former Atalanta player José Luis Palomino apply—he got contaminated by petting his dog, which had been taken to a kennel and unknowingly treated with an ointment containing banned substances,” Cascella explained. “In Sinner’s case, however, it was his own staff who contaminated him, and he could be held responsible for it.”