The case was built not on a positive test, but on abnormalities detected in Bonnamour’s Athlete Biological Passport (ABP) — an electronic record of longitudinal blood and biological data designed to flag possible
doping practices.
The
UCI press release explained: “The Athlete Biological Passport (ABP) is an individual electronic record for each rider, in which the results of all
doping tests collected as part of the ABP programme over a given period are collated.”
Management of the programme is overseen by the International Testing Agency (ITA), in collaboration with the Athlete Passport Management Unit (APMU) of Lausanne. According to the
UCI, “Athlete Biological Passport cases are prosecuted based on the opinion of an independent Expert Panel of the APMU.”
As with all Tribunal rulings, the decision may yet be challenged. The
UCI confirmed that “the decision may be appealed before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) within one month.”
Until then, Bonnamour will remain suspended, and the ruling will be formally published on the
UCI’s website. The governing body added that “the UCI will not comment further on the matter.”
The verdict underscores the
UCI’s determination to act even in the absence of a direct positive test, reinforcing the significance of the Biological Passport in catching long-term
doping practices. For Bonnamour, however, once viewed as a symbol of French cycling’s new wave of attacking riders, this ruling could well be career-defining.