Novak Djokovic: A judge ordered a tennis star to be released from migrant detention in Australia

At a news conference in Belgrade, Serbia, his brother thanked the supporters. “Everything is over, finally and Novak is finally free. Novak was on the tennis court a little earlier, he practiced a little, and that’s how he fights for himself – he plays tennis,” Djordje Djokovic told a news conference. .

“Novak did nothing wrong,” he added, saying he was excited that “the Australian legal system had gone through Novak.”

However, Djordje interrupted a press conference when asked about Djokovic’s positive Covid test on December 16 and his whereabouts the following days.

Djordje confirmed that Djokovic’s test was positive, and when a reporter asked if he was happening on December 17, he stammered and replied, “This press conference has been suspended.”

Srdjan Djokovic, Novak’s father, sitting next to his son, can be heard saying to Djordje that “it is a matter for the court” when the question is asked.

On December 16, the day Djokovic’s test result was positive, he was filmed in three events in which no other participant has been disguised. The next day, he was also photographed at a youth awards ceremony.

An earlier decision, posted via video link in the Australian Federal District Court in Melbourne, came after days of deliberation and public anger over whether a tennis star could play at the Australian Open despite not being vaccinated against the Covid-19 virus.

Expelled and hoping to win the record 21st Grand Slam, Djokovic began a legal challenge.

During the hearing, Djokovic’s legal team claimed he had received the required medical exemption to travel to Australia and bypass Covid-19 vaccination restrictions. The exemption was granted on the grounds that Djokovic had natural immunity after Covid-19 infection in December, his defense argued.

Djokovic, who has previously expressed opposition to Covid-19 vaccines and vaccine mandates, was unvaccinated on arrival in Australia. In his judgment, the judge ruled that if Djokovic had been deported, he would have received a three-year ban from competition from Australia.

The incident has garnered worldwide attention and aroused anger among both his supporters and critics. Some say his case shows that celebrities receive special treatment because of Australia’s strict Covid-19 rules, which have left families divorced for years, and others who believe. coronavirus restrictions violate their civil liberties.

Arguments

Arguments on behalf of both the defense and the government focused mainly on instructions given by the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunization (ATAGI).

Nick Wood, a lawyer representing Djokovic, claimed, according to ATAGI’s advice, that a previous Covid infection provides at least six months of natural protection – “and can therefore be considered a temporary exemption from vaccinations.”

He said Djokovic understood that the government had given him permission to enter Australia, and he had repeatedly appealed to Melbourne federal officers that “he had done absolutely everything he understood needed to enter Australia.”

“Every sensible person would understand, and he understood that he had definitely checked every box,” Wood added.

Lawyers for Australian Home Secretary Karen Andrews defended the decision of the Australian Border Guard to deport Djokovic, arguing that the tennis star gave no medical reason why she could not be vaccinated against Covid-19 disease.

The government said Djokovic was mistaken in thinking that his access was guaranteed and that a previous Covid infection did not match a valid medical reason why he could not be vaccinated.

They referred to the same ATAGI guidelines, which say that despite the recognition of natural protection, a previous infection “is not a contraindication to vaccination” i.e. it is not a valid reason not to take the vaccine.

The government also claimed that while these guidelines suggest that people can temporarily postpone their vaccination after an acute illness, “there was no reference to Djokovic’s serious illness.”

“He’s just said he had a positive Covid-19 test. It’s not the same thing,” the government said in court.

Government attorney Tran said authorities have a low visa waiver bar and that even the possibility of an Australian health risk is a sufficient reason.

However, Judge Anthony Kelly seemed to acknowledge Djokovic’s position when he said he was “uneasy” about the burden placed on the tennis star to provide evidence to the authorities.

Djokovic had recorded a Covid-19 infection in December – which two independent panels saw as good enough reason to delay Djokovic’s need for vaccination.

“What more could this man have done?” Judge Kelly said.

What Djokovic is playing at the Australian Open

The visa difference had threatened Djokovic’s chances of winning the record-breaking 21st Grand Slam at the Australian Open, which starts on January 17 in Melbourne.

Djokovic currently has 20 Grand Slam wins, an all-time record with Rafael Nadal of Spain and Roger Federer of Switzerland.

A win in Melbourne would mean Djokovic breaks the grand slam record held by the biggest man in his career.

That’s a very real opportunity – Djokovic has won the Australian Open nine times before.

Federer, 40, does not play in Melbourne, and although Nadal, 35, plans to play, he is injured.

The pair has faced each other 58 times, and Djokovic leads with 28 wins to 28. Nadal, who won one Australian Open in 2009, is ranked 6th in the world.