Novak Djokovic is set to learn his fate at a court hearing on Sunday morning. The world number one’s visa was cancelled by the Australian immigration minister Alex Hawke on Friday for a second time. An appeal was immediately launched against the decision, calling it “patently irrational” and claiming Hawke’s decision was based purely on the government’s fear that Djokovic’s appearance at the Australian Open, which begins on Monday, might stir anti-vaccine sentiment in the country.

If his expensively compiled legal team win the appeal, Djokovic will take on fellow Serbian Miomir Kecmanovic in the first round on Monday evening, where he is expected to get a hostile reception from the crowd. If the government wins its case, Djokovic will be deported.

It emerged on Friday that Hawke based his finding not on the validity or otherwise of Djokovic’s medical exemption but on the potential for his continued presence in the country to stoke anti-vaccination sentiments and a threat to public order. Hawke cited Djokovic’s status as a “high profile unvaccinated individual, who has indicated publicly that he is opposed to becoming vaccinated against Covid” and said he had “publicly expressed anti-vaccination sentiment”.

Djokovic’s vaccine status key

The state are pointing to the fact that Djokovic could have been vaccinated if he’d chosen to be so.

They claim they don’t need to rely on Djokovic publicly stating that he was or wasn’t.

“It is open to infer that a person in the applicant’s position could have been vaccinated if he had wanted to be,” they say.

They point to the fact that Djokovic was openly against vaccines, even before the Covid pandemic.

The consequences of Djokovic decision

The differing consequences of allowing Djokovic to stay as opposed to those that would come about should he be deported are under discussion.

One of the judges suggests that rescinding Djokovic’s visa could cause “overwhelming public discord and risks of transmission through very large public gatherings”.

The state’s lawyer counters by claiming that allowing “a high profile person who is in many respects a role model” to stay under the current circumstances posed a bigger risk.

He also states that Alex Hawke was “obviously” aware of the reaction that his decision could cause.

State able to rely on common sense

Lloyd, acting on behalf of immigration minister Alex Hawke, has pointed to a recent interjection from one of the judges which stated that the minister is entitled to use common sense when making his decision to rescind a visa and isn’t required to solely rely upon material evidence.

This in theory is a big positive for the state’s case against Djokovic here.

“We certainly embrace the view that it is not limited to evidence before a court, administrative decision-makers usually inform themselves by a much broader range of materials,” he says.

Djokovic a low risk of transmission

Djokovic’s legal team also claimed that their client poses a very low risk of transmission of the disease should he be allowed to enter the country officially.

They said his recent infection and the additional safety protocols around the Australian Open itself make it very unlikely he could be a problem from a public health point of view.

The Serbian tested positive for the virus back in December.

Djokovic being treated like a ‘weapon of mass destruction’

One person who is definitely in Djokovic’s corner is Nick Kyrgios.

The Australian tennis player hasn’t always seen eye to eye with the Serbian but has been heavily critical of his treatment by his country this week.

“We’re treating him like he’s a weapon of mass destruction at the moment,” he said.

“The mistreating of the people of Melbourne over the past two years has been atrocious, and I understand the anger towards him being unvaccinated and the medical exemption, I understand that.

“Now I feel like the people, no matter what Novak does, they’re just going to say ‘get him out of our country’.”

State begin their arguments

Djokovic’s legal team, led by Nicholas Wood, have concluded their submissions.

Stephen Lloyd, acting on behalf of immigration minister Alex Hawke and with him the state, has now begun his submission.

Why does Djokovic oppose the vaccine?

This whole saga wouldn’t have happened if Djokovic had been vaccinated against Covid-19.

So why isn’t he?

Djokovic confirmed he isn’t vaccinated in an interview with Border Force officials when he arrived in Australia 10 days ago, but he hasn’t extensively discussed why he doesn’t want to have it.

However, he does have his reasons.

Novak Djokovic’s

Djokovic’s legal team argue their case

Djokovic lawyers claim that the state has provided no evidence to back up their claim that granting Djokovic a visa would hamper the rollout of the vaccine in the country or that it has seen a rise in the anti-vaccine movement.

“There is no logical connection there whatsoever,” they say. “The anti-vax protests have been directed to action by the state.”

Like Our Story ? Donate to Support Us, Click Here

You want to share a story with us? Do you want to advertise with us? Do you need publicity/live coverage for product, service, or event? Contact us on WhatsApp +16477721660 or email Adebaconnector@gmail.com