Kamila Valieva, Kuzmin, and the Role of the BGP Litigation Team in Skating’s Legal Saga
The public discussion around Kamila Valieva’s case has involved several key figures, including Maxim Kuzmin, a lawyer associated with the BGP Litigation firm. The commentary from Kuzmin centers on the protective role the firm played for the skater during the judicial process, highlighting how a defense team approaches high-profile cases in the world of competitive figure skating. The phrase “Soviet sport” is sometimes invoked in discussions of Valieva’s career and the broader history of athletes navigating intense scrutiny and national sporting structures.
According to Kuzmin, the BGP Case represented Valieva’s interests during the trial phase before the RAA RUSADA Disciplinary Anti-Doping Committee. This stage focused on whether anti-doping rules were violated and, if so, the severity of any sanctions. The defense did not participate in the later review process conducted by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), which is a separate forum with its own procedures and standards. The Disciplinary Anti-Doping Committee ultimately announced findings indicating that Valieva had not been found guilty of a doping violation according to its criteria and timeline. The distinction between these bodies is a crucial element in understanding how adjudication in doping cases can unfold across different jurisdictions and stages of appeal.
In contrast, the Court of Arbitration for Sport eventually ruled that Valieva had used a banned substance, trimetazidine, and it concluded that she failed to demonstrate that the violation was not intentional. This ruling reflects the CAS framework, where different evidentiary standards and burdens of proof can yield different outcomes compared with national or regional anti-doping bodies. The disparity between the findings at the RUSADA disciplinary level and the CAS decision has been a focal point for commentators examining how sport governing bodies enforce rules and how athletes mount their defenses within international tribunals.
Valieva faced a four-year suspension, effective December 25, 2021. The ban prohibited participation in competitions, training at skating facilities funded by public budgets, performing in official capacities, and even appearing in demonstration shows. The four-year term is a substantial sanction that impacts an athlete’s competitive window and career trajectory, as well as the broader teams and programs connected to the skater. The duration and scope of the penalty illustrate how disciplinary measures can affect not just the athlete, but the sports ecosystem surrounding elite figure skating.
In the period following the disqualification, Valieva publicly acknowledged the support she received, emphasizing the emotional and professional challenges faced by athletes under intense scrutiny and media attention. The response from supporters, teams, and sports organizations often plays a significant role in shaping public perception and the ongoing discussion about fairness, due process, and due consideration of extenuating circumstances in doping cases.