According to anti-doping organization conduct which subverts the doping control process but which would not otherwise be included in the definition of prohibited methods is not approved.
The organization further states that tampering also is not allowed.
Anti Doping Education officer Mr Khotso Mahloko said tampering shall include, without limitation, intentionally interfering or attempting to interfere with a doping control official, providing fraudulent information to an anti-doping organization or intimidating or attempting to intimidate a potential witness.
Mahloko stipulates that section 2.6.1 advocates that possession by an athlete in-competition or out-competition of any prohibited substance or any prohibited method need not be entertained.
He said it suffice to say the athlete established that the possession is consistent with a therapeutic use exemption (TUE) granted in accordance with Article 4.4 or other acceptable justification.
Section 2.6.2 disallows possession by an athlete support person in-competition of any prohibited substance or any prohibited method, and out-of-competition of any prohibited substance.
Mahloko said in order to prove unintentional use the athlete support person should establishes that the possession is consistent with a TUE granted to an athlete in accordance with Article 4.4 or other acceptable justification.
Anti doping officer further attributed that administration or attempted administration to any athlete attracts punishment, regardless whether it was done in-competition or not.
He concluded by saying that complicity assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, conspiring, covering up or any other type of intentional is the violation of Article 10.12, therefore needs to be avoided by all costs in sporting arena.