BETA
This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here

More From Forbes

Edit Story

Djokovic Deported From Australia After Court Upholds Second Visa Cancellation

Following
This article is more than 2 years old.

Serbian tennis star Novak Djokovic ran out of options today to remain in Australia and play in the Australian Open that starts Monday.

A three-judge federal court in Melbourne ruled the country’s immigration minister had the authority to revoke for the second time the visa of the world’s top-ranked tennis player two days ago because he was not vaccinated against Covid-19. He could be banned from returning to the country for three years.

CNN reported that Djokovic left Australia on an Emirates flight to Dubai. His final destination was not known.

Early Reactions

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison said, “I welcome the decision to keep our borders strong and keep Australians safe.

"I thank the Court for their prompt attention to these issues and the patience of all involved as we have worked to resolve this issue. It's now time to get on with the Australian Open and get back to enjoying tennis over the summer.”

Fox Sports reported that, “Social media has reacted in a flurry of emotive and divided responses, from those who welcomed the decision, to Djokovic supporters registering their outrage at how “Australia embarrassed itself today.”

Djokovic’s Statement

"I am extremely disappointed with the Court ruling to dismiss my application for judicial review of the Minister's decision to cancel my visa, which means I cannot stay in Australia and participate in the Australian Open," Djokovic said in a statement.

"I respect the Court's ruling and I will cooperate with the relevant authorities in relation to my departure from the country," he added.

Djokovic said he was "uncomfortable" that the focus had been on him since his visa was first canceled on arrival at Melbourne's airport on January 6, according to ESPN.

Ripple Effects Of The Crisis

But in ending the rollercoaster tennis drama, today’s court’s decision—which cannot be appealed—could create new dramas, challenges and crisis situations on several fronts.

  • How will organizers of the Australian Open respond to the void in the tournament that was created by Djokovic’s deportation from the country?
  • Will Aussie anti-vaxxers use the court’s ruling as a rallying cry and Djokovic as a symbol for their cause?
  • Will Djokovic be denied entry in other countries that require Covid vaccinations as a condition for receiving a visa?
  • What impact will the crisis have on Australia’s image, reputation and tourism industry?
  • How will today’s decision affect Australia’s relations with Serbia? Judging by the comments of Serbia’s president, things are not off to a good start.

Analysis

Although the crisis began as a result of apparent bureaucratic bungling and policy conflicts, the response to the unfolding situation by the government and judiciary was swift, reasoned and based on existing policies, procedures and protocols. Djokovic and his attorneys had ample opportunities to present their side of the story during the court proceedings—and in the court of public opinion.

“Rules are rules,” the prime minister said in a Tweet when the crisis first broke, “especially when it comes to our borders. No one is above these rules. Our strong border policies have been critical to Australia having one of the lowest death rates in the world from Covid. [We] are continuing to be vigilant.”

As the crisis wore on, it turned out that Djokovic was more at fault than was first reported. He admitted that his travel documents included false information and made public appearances after testing positive for Covid in December.

Others, however, have different views on the origins and resolution of the situation.

Accusations

The Daily Mail reported that, “Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic accused Australian prime minister Scott Morrison of playing politics ahead of an upcoming election.

“Vucic accused Australian government lawyers of 'lying' during 'pointless' court proceedings when they stated less than half of Serbians were vaccinated.

“You saw in the pointless court proceeding how much the prosecution lied,” he said. “They are simply lying. They say there are fewer than 50 percent vaccinated people in Serbia and officially the number is 58 percent.”

‘Denied The Right To Compete’

According to The Age, “Serbia’s Olympic Committee said it was very disappointed with the deportation of Novak Djokovic as well as the fact he was ‘denied the chance to confirm the title of the greatest tennis player of all time.’”

“Sport is globally [and] constantly striving to remain independent of politics and outside influences, as the best only win in those circumstances. Obviously that was not the case this time and in an unsporting manner, Novak was denied the right to compete for his tenth Australian Open title.”

The Committee said in a statement Djokovic had been treated “absolutely unacceptably” despite respecting all rules and conditions Australia had placed on him.

“It was particularly unacceptable to have obviously waited for a last-minute decision before the tournament began, so that Novak would be in a completely unequal position to the other tennis players had he been allowed to stay in Australia.”

The Committee said it was proud of Djokovic and the way he handled detention and court proceedings as a “dignified champion.”

“That is why, despite this scandalous decision, we regard Novak as a winner once again.”

‘Not A Public Health Threat’

Marina Mara is an Australia-based international media, brand and reputation advisor. She observed that, “Novak Djokovic may have made some severe errors of judgment concerning his border declarations, but he entered the country in good faith, and he's not a public health threat to Australia.”

Australia’s Brand May Take A Hit

She predicted that, “Australia will eventually recover [from the crisis], but its economy, image and brand may take a hit in the process. The final step in crisis PR is evaluation, and one can only hope that the Australian federal and state governments will carefully assess their actions. 

“Whilst it is not debatable that Australia, like any nation, can enforce its sovereign rights, what is debatable is how poorly the guidelines and regulations were communicated,” Mara said.


Follow me on Twitter or LinkedInCheck out my website or some of my other work here