For weeks, the debate about Novak Djokovic’s entry into Australia kept tennis fans on tenterhooks. Then it was clear: he must leave the country. Now there was the official reason why Djokovic was not allowed to play.
Four days after Novak Djokovic’s appeal against the cancellation of his visa was rejected, the Federal Court has announced its reasoning. According to it, it was reasonable for the Australian government to assume that the Serbian tennis pro had an anti-vaccination attitude and was a threat to the public. This is according to documents released by the court on Thursday.
“A world tennis star can influence people of all ages, young and old, but perhaps especially the young and the impressionable,” the three judges’ reasoning said. Even if Djokovic had not won the Australian Open, the fact that he was playing tennis in Australia could have encouraged those who wanted to be like him, and he could accordingly have fuelled anti-vaccine sentiment, they said.
View justified
The Djokovic side had previously argued that it was inappropriate to portray the Serbian tennis star as anti-vaccination and that Immigration Minister Alex Hawke could not have known his attitude. However, the court considered it established that the government’s view was justified, partly because Djokovic had decided not to vaccinate.
Blamage at Australian Open: German tennis is in crisis
Breakdown at Australian Open: Heavy defeat for German tennis pro
Research against Corona: Djokovic buys biotech company
After a days-long court battle, the Federal Court in Melbourne had declared the visa withdrawal legal last Sunday. The world number one had to leave Australia as a result and cannot defend his title at the current Australian Open. Djokovic had travelled to Australia unvaccinated because he wanted to take part in the Grand Slam tournament with a medical exemption. Upon entry, however, his visa was cancelled because the 34-year-old Serb could not provide sufficient evidence for the special permit.
