 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. |
Further implications
Further implications
The debate surrounding whether Novak Djokovic should have been allowed to remain in Australia is a shifting one, with positions depending on the perspective from which the question is viewed.
Djokovic entered Australia with what he believed was a valid vaccination exemption given him by Tennis Australia after his low-risk status resulting from him recently having contracted COVID. This exemption had been overseen by two medical panels. The chief executive officer of Tennis Australia, Craig Tilley, claims that it was supported by Victorian government health officials. His exemption was initially accepted by the Department of Home Affairs and Djokovic was granted an entry visa.
Djokovic's acceptance into Australia immediately became contentious as it had repeatedly been stated by the government and the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation that entry from overseas required double vaccination or a medical exemption. Speculation was rife as to what medical condition could possibly justify a supremely fit international athlete not being vaccinated. Djokovic initially refused to explain the basis on which his exemption had been given and so the controversy over his being allowed to enter the country continued.
Two government ministers indicated that the federal government, as the ultimate determiner off who was legally able to enter the country, would investigate the matter further and the Prime Minister indicated that no special provisions would be made for elite athletes. Eight hours after he had arrived in Australia, Australian Border Force revoked Djokovic's visa on the basis that he had failed to supply sufficient evidence to justify it having been granted.
The dispute seemed to lie between Tennis Australia and the federal authorities. It was later revealed that in November 2021 the Federal Health Minister, Greg Hunt, had informed Tennis Australia that though in some circumstances having recently contracted COVID could act as grounds for a vaccination exemption, in the case of players at the forthcoming Australian Open these grounds were not sufficient. Tennis Australia has made no comment regarding the Minister's advice and the Victorian government has claimed it was never referred to them. Djokovic, in the meantime, was taken into Immigration Detention as an illegal immigrant.Djokovic seems to have acted on the assurance he was given by Tennis Australia and the medical exemption they had supplied him with, ratified by two medical panels. Djokovic appealed against the cancellation of his visa and Federal Circuit Court judge, Anthony Kelly, upheld his appeal, noting that Djokovic had not been given sufficient time to respond to Border Force's challenge to his visa.
What followed was a media investigation of Djokovic's claim to have previously contracted COVID, with concerns being voiced that while apparently COVID positive in December 2021 Djokovic had not immediately gone into isolation. The entire course of this controversy had been marked by public protest with groups taking to the street to support Djokovic, to oppose him, to oppose compulsory vaccination and to oppose the government's treatment of illegal immigrants. Ultimately, Djokovic's visa was revoked a second time, this time by the Minister for Immigration, Alex Hawke. Now, however, the grounds on which the visa was removed were not that Djokovic posed a health risk because he was not vaccinated. The Minister explained that Djokovic's visa had been withdrawn because his presence would encourage antivaxxers and others simply reluctant to be vaccinated not to be immunised.
Therefore, the threat he presented came to be seen as one of setting a negative example, rather than being a direct health risk. He was also seen to be a threat to public order as his presence could lead to street protests. On January 17, 2022, three federal court judges endorsed the Immigration Minister's decision.The issue raises concerns on numerous levels. Firstly, it is a dramatic instance of a failure of federation. It is possible that Tennis Australia deliberately ignored Health Minister Hunt's warning that having recently contracted COVID would not provide a vaccination exemption for Australian Open players. However, it is remarkable that federal and state governments have not collaboratively clarified the position of athletes entering the country. It should not have been left to Tennis Australia to tell Djokovic or any other player that they were medically exempt.
Also concerning is the way the basis for the decision to revoke Djokovic's visa appears to have shifted over time. If the primary reason he was to be denied entry became that his presence would encourage antivaxxers then that reason existed back in November of 2022 and before. The case seems to be being made that high profile public figures need to be held to a higher standard regarding public health issues. This is something that could presumably have been made apparent to all sporting bodies and state governments at least at the end of last year.