Australia’s difficult dilemma with Djokovic

When Australian immigration authorities rejected Novak Djokovic’s medical exemption from the COVID-19 vaccination requirement and canceled his Australian visa, they opened a battle with bureaucratic, political and legal consequences.

The world’s top-ranked male tennis player was held in a dingy detention hotel for four days, among undocumented migrants and asylum seekers, before federal Circuit Court Judge Anthony Kelly restored his visa and ordered his release.

Australian Immigration Minister Alex Hawke must now decide whether to use his authority to revoke the tennis player’s visa, an issue with strong political overtones.

Where is he now?

First, in an accommodation of a higher standard. When the judge ruled in his favor on Monday, Djokovic was immediately released from Melbourne’s Park Hotel to meet his team in a luxurious apartment for the remainder of his stay in Australia.

Djokovic was not long in coming to the Australian Open venue, Melbourne Park, for an evening training session. He also trained on Tuesday, indicating his goal remains to pursue his 21st Grand Slam title.

But there are no guarantees yet that he will be able to play. The Immigration Minister has postponed to Wednesday his decision on whether to revoke the tennis player’s visa for public health reasons, contemplated in Australian immigration law.

“In line with due process, Minister Hawke will consider the matter thoroughly. As the matter is still under development, for legal reasons it is inappropriate to comment further, ”a Hawke spokesperson said.

Another question on the table is whether Djokovic could have incorrectly filled out his entry into the country form when he checked a box indicating that he had not traveled in the 14 days prior to his arrival in Australia on January 6. In reality, Djokovic had traveled to Spain to train in that period.

What did the court say?

Perhaps the key to the whole thing, and the most difficult question to answer, is whether Djokovic has a legitimate right to a medical exemption to enter Australia unvaccinated.

Tournament organizer Tennis Australia, the Victorian state government and the federal government have conflicting views.

Before traveling to Australia, Djokovic had been elusive about whether he had been vaccinated. When questioned by border agents at Melbourne Airport early Thursday, he admitted no.

His request for a medical exemption to the rule that all travelers without Australian citizenship must be vaccinated to enter the country was based on his claim that he tested positive for coronavirus on December 16.

Medical committees formed by Tennis Australia and the Victorian government granted the exemption so that Djokovic could play in the Australian Open on that basis. The tennis player’s lawyers argued that he had every reason to think that the same criteria would apply at the border.

The Australian Border Force was not satisfied with the documents Djokovic presented at Melbourne Airport and canceled his visa.

Judge Kelly concluded that the border service should have given Djokovic more time to fix his paperwork before proceeding with the interrogation that ended with the annulment of his visa.

“The decision to proceed with the questioning and cancel that visa was unreasonable,” Kelly said.

What about Djokovic’s COVID-19 case?

Djokovic was quick to celebrate the court decision. During his four days held, he only tweeted once, to thank his followers for their support.

On Tuesday morning he tweeted again to express his gratitude that the court had endorsed his position.

“I am satisfied and grateful that the judge revoked the cancellation of my visa,” he tweeted. “Despite everything that has happened, I want to stay and try to compete in the Australian Open. I’m still focused on that. I traveled here to play in one of the most important events that we have in front of the fantastic fans ”.

There are still doubts about Djokovic’s recent positive. On December 16, a PCR was done and that night he was notified of the positive.

Photographs and videos taken in the following days show Djokovic, without a mask, at public events such as an award ceremony at a children’s tennis tournament in Belgrade. COVID-19 protocols in Serbia would have required it to isolate itself for 11 days.

What role does politics play?

Djokovic arrived in Melbourne as the region broke daily records for infections. The omicron variant also promoted cases in other areas of the country.

The government of Prime Minister Scott Morrison has been criticized for relaxing some restrictions against the virus as omicron infections began to rise, and for not speeding up the distribution of rapid antigen tests.

Morrison didn’t have much to say when Tennis Australia and the Victorian government agreed to Djokovic’s request for a medical exemption. But when the tennis player’s visa was canceled, he was quick to make the decision given the popularity of the measure.

He tweeted that “rules are rules”, something he reiterated in interviews in the following days. At first, it seemed like a sure political victory.

Tight border controls in Australia for most of the pandemic separated families by preventing Australians living abroad from returning home. The possibility that one of the world’s most successful athletes and a prominent vaccine skeptic might receive special treatment at the border was one that Morrison could not condone.

Melbourne residents have also had reason to reject Djokovic’s special treatment. Melbourne has been one of the cities in the world that has suffered the most quarantines, as its inhabitants spent 256 days under strict restrictions in successive waves of COVID-19.

But while Djokovic found himself being held among asylum seekers in Melbourne, public opinion was softening. And since the judge ruled against the government’s lawyers, complaints have been voiced that the inefficient handling of the case has given Australia a bad image.