Exclusive: ITIA chief insists Jannik Sinner and Iga Swiatek did not get different treatment after failed drug tests
The International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) chief has firmly stated that Jannik Sinner and Iga Swiatek did not receive different treatment following their respective failed drug tests, addressing concerns about fairness and transparency in handling doping cases involving high-profile players.
Both Sinner and Swiatek were involved in controversies in 2024 after testing positive for banned substances. Sinner tested positive for Clostebol, a prohibited substance, while Swiatek tested positive for Trimetazidine. However, the outcomes of their cases sparked speculation, with some questioning whether there was unequal treatment based on their status or circumstances.
The ITIA chief emphasized that both cases were handled according to standard procedures, with each player undergoing thorough investigations to determine fault or negligence. “Our protocols ensure that every athlete is treated equally, regardless of their ranking or profile,” the ITIA official asserted.
In Sinner’s case, the substance was found to have entered his system through contamination during a massage, and after an initial investigation, he was cleared of any wrongdoing. However, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) later appealed the decision, prolonging the case and leaving Sinner’s fate in the hands of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
Swiatek’s case, on the other hand, was swiftly resolved with a one-month suspension and a fine after she explained that Trimetazidine, which she had used to address sleep issues, was unintentionally ingested. Her cooperation and transparency reportedly played a key role in the swift resolution.
The ITIA chief reiterated that both players were judged based on the specific facts of their cases, and the differences in the outcomes were purely due to the nature of the substances involved, the circumstances surrounding their use, and each athlete’s response during the investigation.
“We follow strict guidelines and base our decisions on evidence, not player profiles or external pressures. In both cases, our aim was to ensure a fair process,” the ITIA official concluded, hoping to put an end to any lingering doubts about the integrity of the system.
