(CNN) — Three judges who unanimously rejected Novak Djokovic’s request to stay in Australia and play the Australian Open tennis revealed the reasons for their ruling.
In a written statement, the justices said it was not unreasonable for Immigration Minister Alex Hawke to expel Djokovic out of concern that the unvaccinated Serbian star might pose a risk to public health and order.
The ruling said the minister could infer that Djokovic’s presence could fuel anti-vaccine protests, which could help the spread of covid-19.
And they pointed out that the minister’s decision also included the possible influence of the star on people who were not sure about getting the vaccine.
“The possible influence on the second group comes from common sense and human experience: an iconic world tennis star can influence people of all ages, young or old, but perhaps especially the young and impressionable, to emulate him. This is not it is imaginary; it does not need proof, ”said the ruling.
End of the controversy
The explanation ends one of the most controversial episodes in the history of the Australian Open.
The world No. 1 player was forced to leave the country on the eve of the competition after the court found no fault with the immigration minister’s decision to cancel his visa.
It was the second time Djokovic’s visa had been cancelled: the first came hours after he arrived in Australia on January 5, when Australian Border Force (ABF) officials rejected his alleged exemption from rules that all new arrivals must be fully vaccinated.
Djokovic said a previous Covid-19 infection meant he was exempt, but under federal rules that’s not enough and he was detained at an immigration center.
The matter went to court, with a single judge ruling the decision “unreasonable” because he was not given enough time to consult his lawyers. Djokovic was released from detention and resumed training at Melbourne Park in hopes of securing his 21st Grand Slam title.
However, days later the government intervened to cancel his visa again, stating that the unvaccinated player was a threat to public health and order. The matter was referred to a higher court and the three judges met last Sunday.
Djokovic’s legal team did not discuss the merits of the minister’s decision, only that he had made a jurisdictional error under the country’s immigration law.
On Sunday, the judges ruled that there had been no mistake and Djokovic agreed to walk away.
Djokovic ‘disappointed’
In a statement, the player said he was “disappointed” with the decision but respected the court’s ruling. That night he left Melbourne for Serbia, where he received a hero’s welcome.
Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabic said Australia’s treatment of the star was “scandalous”. Brnabic told CNN on Wednesday that he did not know why Djokovic had not been vaccinated, but added that he does not think he is anti-vax.
“He supports the vaccination of those people who want to be vaccinated. So I don’t see it as anti-vaccine,” he said.
Novak Djokovic after landing in Belgrade, Serbia, on Monday, January 17.
In a statement shortly after Sunday’s ruling, Djokovic’s family blamed politics for the decision.
“This is not only a sporting issue and about playing in the first grand slam of the season, dominated by Novak for a decade, but also about politics, as well as all the interests that took precedence over sports,” the statement said.
Under Australian law, Djokovic can be expelled from the country for three years, although Home Secretary Karen Andrews has not ruled out a waiver. “Any application will be reviewed on its merits,” he said earlier this week.
On Tuesday, Tennis Australia lamented that the visa dispute had distracted players at the tournament.
“We deeply regret the impact this had on all players,” the statement said. “There are always lessons to be learned, and we will review all aspects of our preparation and implementation to inform our planning, as we do every year. That process always begins once the Australian Open champions have lifted their trophies.”
The grand slam ends on January 31.
