Right: Minister Alex Hawke confirmed Djokovic would be deported after a Federal Court appeal was rejected.
 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Arguments opposing Novak Djokovic playing in the Australian Open
1. Djokovic was ineligible to enter Australia
Those who argue that Novak Djokovic should not have been granted a visa to play at the Australian Open note that he did not meet the regulations set by the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI)
Tennis Australia justified granting Djokovic a medical exemption to enter Australia without being fully vaccinated based on his having contracted COVID within the preceding six months. However, critics of Djokovic's initial exemption argue that it was not in line with federal regulations. People must be fully vaccinated as defined by the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) to be allowed enter the country without having to quarantine. Fully vaccinated, according to this body means having had two doses of a Covid-19 vaccine.
In November 2021, Health Minister Greg Hunt wrote to Tennis Australia's chief executive officer Craig Tiley warning that players who sought to enter the country would not be granted vaccine exemptions if they had recently contracted COVID-19. Hunt's letter, dated November 29, 2021, stated, 'The Australian Border Force has advised that people must be fully vaccinated, as defined by the ATAGI, to gain quarantine-free entry into Australia... I can confirm that people who contracted COVID-19 within the past six months and seek to enter Australia from overseas and have not received two doses of a Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA)-approved or TGA-recognised vaccine (or one dose of the Johnson and Johnson COVID-19 vaccine), are not considered fully vaccinated.'
Recent prior infection can be a ground for vaccine exemption within Australia; it specifically does not act as a basis for internal travellers to be allowed into the country. The Federal government has indicated that Tennis Australia had exceeded its authority in granting Djokovic a medical exemption as control of entry to Australia rests with federal authorities. The Victorian government has acknowledged that the granting of visas is a federal concern. Then acting Victorian premier, Jacinta Allan, has stated that the state government only sought to assess whether players could be granted a vaccine exemption for events held in Victoria. Ms Allen added, 'It's the Commonwealth government that is responsible for issuing visas and how they engage in that dialogue with bodies like Tennis Australia is a matter for them.'
Federal Home Affairs Minister Karen Andrews stated that Djokovic had had a visa issued to him in error, but that Border Force had determined he did not meet entry requirements because he was not fully vaccinated. Criticism has been levelly at Tennis Australia's head Craig Tilley for ignoring Health Minister Hunt's directive of November 2021. In an opinion piece published in the Los Angeles Times on January 16, 2022, it was argued, 'Tiley either misunderstood or wilfully disobeyed a notice from a federal health minister in late November that said previously having been infected with COVID-19 wasn't a valid reason to exempt a player from the vaccine requirement. Tiley has said he was told otherwise by officials in the state of Victoria, where Melbourne is located, and he proceeded on that basis. He said the problem was poor communication between state and federal officials, but that's not good enough. He should have demanded clarity, if that was lacking, and should have realized flouting the rules wouldn't go over well among Aussies.'
2. Djokovic's opposition to vaccinations could encourage Australian antivaxxers
Opponents of Novak Djokovic being allowed to enter Australia to play in the Australian Open argue that his known opposition to COVID vaccinations could have encouraged the antivaccination movement in Australia.
Djokovic had not publicly stated his vaccination status or stated his position on COVID vaccinations; however, once the publicity surrounding his entry into Australia had made his unvaccinated status known there were fears he would become a symbol for the anti-vaccination movement. In an opinion piece published in The Interpreter on January 14, 2022, it was stated, 'He is probably already seen as the most famous anti-vaxxer in the world. The declarations of "freedom" by his family will resonate with those agitating against vaccine mandates.'
Immigration Minister Alex Hawke withdrew Djokovic's visa on several grounds, one of which was the danger he believes Djokovic poses to public health in Australia. The minister stated, 'I consider that Mr Djokovic's ongoing presence in Australia may lead to an increase in anti-vaccination sentiment generated in the Australian community.' In his written justification of his decision, the minister gave further details, stating that his presence may lead to 'a) other unvaccinated persons refusing to become vaccinated, b) other unvaccinated persons being reinforced in their existing view not to become vaccinated, and/or c) a reduction in the uptake of booster vaccines.' Hawke explained that a reduction in vaccinations would result in an increase in disease and deaths in Australia.
Immigration Minister Hawke also argued that Djokovic's failure to isolate after being diagnosed with COVID could provoke similar behaviour in Australia. The Minister stated, 'Given Mr Djokovic's high-profile status and position as a role model in the sporting and broader community, his ongoing presence in Australia may foster similar disregard for the precautionary requirements following receipt of a positive COVID-19 test in Australia.' The Minister added, 'In particular, his behaviour may encourage or influence others to emulate his prior conduct and fail to comply with appropriate health measures following a positive COVID-19 test, which itself could lead to the transmission of the disease and serious risk to their health and others.'
Three Federal Court judges upheld the decision made by Hawke to cancel Djokovic's visa on public interest grounds. The court ruled it was reasonable to be concerned that Novak Djokovic might have inspired anti-vaccine sentiment. Laying out its reasons for backing that decision, the court said Djokovic's opposition to vaccines was well-known. It stated, 'An iconic world tennis star may influence people of all ages.' In its formal written decision, it found that Djokovic could encourage 'especially the young and the impressionable, to emulate him...This is not fanciful; it does not need evidence. It is the recognition of human behaviour.' It further explained, '[Djokovic] had for over a year chosen not to be vaccinated since vaccines became available.' They also noted that the minister was concerned by reports that anti-vaccination groups 'had portrayed Mr Djokovic as a hero and an icon of freedom of choice'. The court also referred to prior published statements made by Djokovic which indicated his opposition to vaccination. A BBC article titled '"What has Novak Djokovic actually said about vaccines?' was cited as a record of the star's historic comments, including that he had, before Covid vaccines were available, said he was 'opposed to vaccination'.
Djokovic's opposition to vaccinations has become clearer over time. In his home country of Serbia, his comments regarding vaccinations have been criticised by government epidemiologist Predrag Kon, who accused him of 'creating misconceptions'.
Since being required to leave Australia, Djokovic has stated, 'I was never against vaccination, but I've always supported the freedom to choose what you put in your body.' Critics have noted that this is a contradictory position and that his actual attitude toward vaccinations is demonstrated by his refusal to be vaccinated. In a BBC interview after leaving Australia, Djokovic when asked about the possibility of being excluded from competitions such as the French Open because of his vaccination status, Djokovic stated, that this was 'the price that I'm willing to pay.' 3. Djokovic's continued presence in Australia could provoke public disorder
Opponents od Novak Djokovic being allowed to remain in Australia have argued that his continued presence is likely to create public disorder.
The Minister for Immigration, Alex Hawke, stated that one of the reasons why he had revoked Novak Djokovic's visa was that he believes that the tennis champion's continued stay in Australia would provoke 'civil unrest'. The Minister referred to the protests that Djokovic's presence in Australia had caused and the disorder that could result from these. He stated, 'I consider that Mr Djokovic's ongoing presence in Australia may lead to an increase in anti-vaccination sentiment...potentially leading to an increase in civil unrest of the kind previously experienced in Australia with rallies and protests which may themselves be a source of community transmission.'
Djokovic's presence in Australia followed by the first cancellation of his visa has resulted in several protests. On January 7, 2022, Forbes reported, 'A large group of protesters gathered Friday outside the Melbourne hotel where Novak Djokovic is being detained, including supporters demanding his release, anti-vaxxers and activists calling attention to refugees detained at the hotel, as the saga surrounding world's top-ranked men's tennis player put a spotlight on Australia's stringent immigration and vaccination policies.'
On the same day, The Age reported, 'Novak Djokovic supporters say they will keep gathering outside the Melbourne hotel where he is being detained until the tennis champion is released...One woman who did not want her name published said she would return daily. "He is more than a tennis player," she said. "He is our idol." Earlier a man using a megaphone outside the hotel urged people to "hold the line" and defend freedom and liberty."' Critics of Djokovic remaining in Australia have noted that his capacity to provoke violent protests remained even after the initial ban on his visa was overturned. ABC News reported on January 10, 2022, 'A man has been arrested and dozens of people pepper sprayed by police after a crowd of Novak Djokovic fans swarmed outside his lawyers' office after a court ordered his release from immigration detention...Officers used pepper spray to disperse the group of people...Police said the use of pepper spray was necessary due to the "aggressive behaviour of the crowd".'
Prior to the Novak Djokovic controversy, antivaxxers had already been identified as a source of public disorder in Australia. In an article published in The Washington Post on December 1, 2021, it is noted, 'One state leader was threatened with beheading over his vaccine mandate. Another was hanged in effigy...A small but highly visible anti-vaccine movement routinely shuts down city centers with protests, some of which have turned violent, and has trained its anger on politicians who have supported vaccine mandates.'
The Washington Post reported on September 21, 2021, that 'Angry mobs swarmed Australia's second-most-populous city, Melbourne, for a second straight day... after officials halted all nonessential building work in the city following a violent demonstration against vaccine mandates for the construction industry a day earlier...The latest protests follow a string of recent demonstrations across the country, including one where construction workers blocked streets across Melbourne in a sit-down against the closure of construction site break rooms.' 4. Djokovic has a history of irresponsible behaviour regarding public health regulations
Those who oppose Djokovic being granted a visa to play in Australia claim that not only is his unvaccinated status potentially a hazard, but they also claim that his reckless behaviour regarding disease transmission increases the risk he poses.
Djokovic has claimed that he was diagnosed with COVID on December 16, 2021. His behaviour before and immediately after this diagnosis have been criticised as seriously irresponsible. On the same day he purportedly tested positive, he received a commemorative stamp in his honour at an event hosted by the Serbian National Postal Service on December 16. He shared photos of the event to social media the next day. He was not isolating or wearing a mask. Djokovic also attended an award ceremony at the Novak Tennis Centre in Belgrade on December 17. Multiple photos on social media show him posing for photos with children without wearing a mask.
This behaviour has been criticised by many commentators. News Corp's sports editor Todd Balym has stated on Twitter, 'So either Djokovic is lying and the positive covid test is fraudulent, or this "hero" has such a blatant disregard for anyone & everyone else he was happy to risk exposing covid to children. His reputation is in utter ruins, no coming back from this.'
The Economist's Stanley Pignal also added on Twitter 'A problem for Djokovic: if he claims he had Covid recently, his (and others') social media should include a period where he isn't indoors, maskless, with lots of people. And for now, that seems hard to find.' Then, on December 18, 2021, Djokovic was interviewed and photographed without a mask by L'Équipe. Djokovic has claimed he was unaware of his COVID positive status before December 18; however, he admits to knowing he was COVID positive when he gave the L'Equipe interview. Djokovic has said of that interview, 'While I went home after the interview to isolate for the required period, on reflection, this was an error of judgement and I accept that I should have rescheduled this commitment.'
L'Equipe journalist, Franck Ramella, has since noted that he had been told not to ask Djokovic about his vaccination status or the forthcoming Australian Open so 'therefore did not ask if he had considered doing a test'. Simon Chambers, co-president of the International Tennis Writers Association has described this incident as 'deeply concerning'. Chambers has stated, 'As journalists, we take great care to adhere to all Covid-19 rules in place and we expect all players to do the same.' Djokovic's conduct was in violation of Serbian laws regarding COVID control. It has since been announced Djokovic could face a fine or imprisonment in Serbia after his admission that he broke isolation while he had Covid in December. The Serbian prime minister warned Djokovic's behaviour appeared to be 'a clear breach' of the rules. Lawyers in Serbia told local reporters that breaking the country's strict isolation rules was an offence under article 248 of the criminal code, and subject to a fine or prison sentence of up to three years - although community service was more likely.
Some critics have questioned Djokovic's willingness to follow regulations and protect public safety. Former Australian Labor senator Steven Conroy has claimed that Novak Djokovic is a 'pampered, entitled' athlete who thinks he can 'game the system'. Mr Conroy added, 'I have zero sympathy for Djokovic. This is a bloke that does not take the rules seriously.'
5. It is unjust that Djokovic's status as a tennis champion should exempt him from public health regulations
Critics have claimed that making special provisions for high-profile athletes, allowing them to avoid the regulations that apply to ordinary citizens, is unjust.
Critics claim there is a fundamental injustice in making special COVID provisions for a privileged few. Stephen Parnis, a former vice-president of the Australian Medical Association, has stated, 'I don't care how good a tennis player he is. If he's refusing to get vaccinated, he shouldn't be allowed in. If this exemption is true, it sends an appalling message to millions seeking to reduce COVID19 risk to themselves and others.
' The same point has been made at length by James Buckley in an opinion piece published in The Canberra Times on January 5, 2022. Buckley stated, 'Hands up if you were genuinely surprised to hear Novak Djokovic had been granted a medical exemption to play in the Australian Open. Horrified, perhaps. Angry, yes. Frustrated, let down, disgusted, feeling like we've all just been given a massive slap in the face.Sadness for the residents of this country who have time and again been denied international and interstate travel during this pandemic to see dying loved ones. For those who have been separated from their children, or unable to attend the funeral of a close friend or family member. Unfortunately, the rules are different if you're a global sporting superstar, even if you've exhibited zero respect for a virus that has infected almost 300 million people across the world over the past two years.'
This perception of injustice has been supported by Eugene Robinson writing for the Boulder Daily Camera (a United States paper published out of Colorado.) Robinson has stated, 'If I were an Australian citizen, I'd be livid at the idea that Djokovic could waltz into the country - defiantly unvaccinated - and blithely go about staking his claim as tennis's greatest of all time. I'd remember the early phase of the pandemic, when thousands of Aussies were stranded abroad for weeks or even months, barred from coming home. I'd remember the repeated lockdowns that were among the strictest and most punishing in the world.'
Djokovic being able to remain in Australia and compete in the Australian Open has been perceived as unjust by a clear majority of Australians. A poll released on January 16, 2022, showed most Australians were opposed to him remaining. A survey shows 71 percent of Australians wanted Novak Djokovic to be deported ahead of the Australian Open. Asked their view during several days of national debate, 78 percent of Coalition voters said the tennis star should not be allowed to stay and play, 75 percent of Labor voters said the same and 64 percent of uncommitted voters concurred.
The same position has been put in numerous letters published in Australian papers. In a letter published in The Age on January 16, 2022, Jim Killacky wrote, 'I wish that Novak Djokovic would simply accept the ruling of the Immigration Minister Alex Hawke and go home. From everything I have read here, he now seems to be trying to use his considerable sporting prestige to get around the rules. I hope the Australian government position will be upheld. Anything else will reek of the powerful and wealthy getting their way - while the real suffering and hardship around the world continues to be insufficiently addressed.'
It has further been claimed that not only have athletes been able to ignore COVID restrictions, but they have also been given preferential access to tests and treatments. In an article published in Sportscasting on March 31, 2020, it was stated, 'Since the COVID-19 outbreak started in the United States, daily sports headlines have reported one athlete after another getting tested while many in hard-hit areas have no such access to testing. In recent days, there have been reports of MLB players getting elective surgeries when it has been recommended all operations be postponed or cancelled.' The author of the piece, Kyle Dalton, highlighted the inequality of this preferential treatment and asked, 'Why are these athletes getting access to medical testing and surgeries not available to the general public in such a moment of crisis?'