‘Assassination attempt’: Novak Djokovic deported, flees Australia

Novak Djokovic has boarded a flight and left Australia after he failed to overturn Immigration Minister Alex Hawke’s decision to cancel his visa.

Novak Djokovic left Australia late on Sunday night after the 20-time grand slam champion’s legal team failed to overturn Immigration Minister Alex Hawke’s decision to cancel his visa.

Djokovic, looking forlorn and wearing a mask, was pictured under AFP police escort at Melbourne Airport.

The 34-year-old boarded an Emirates flight to Dubai after his plans to dominate the Australian Open were torpedoed when three judges unanimously dismissed his last-ditch appeal to stay Down Under.

Watch Tennis Live with bin SPORTS on Kayo. Live Coverage of ATP + WTA Tour Tournaments including Every Finals Match. New to Kayo? Start Your Free Trial >

A Dubai-bound plane carrying Serbia's Novak Djokovic preparing to depart from Melbourne Airport in Melbourne. Picture: Mell Chun / AFP

JUST IN | Novak Djokovic under AFP escort in the lounge at Melbourne Airport ahead of his flight back to Europe via Dubai next hour. #AusOpenpic.twitter.com/Mb47tW76VC

— Shane McInnes (@shanemcinnes) January 16, 2022

Novak Djokovic leaves the Marhaba lounge at Melbourne Airport for flight back to Europe. pic.twitter.com/Rg2D1XTTwW

— Shane McInnes (@shanemcinnes) January 16, 2022

Djokovic’s court case was heard by a full bench of the Federal Court of Australia on Sunday, which ruled unanimously to deport the Serbian star.

Speaking on behalf of the full court less than 24 hours before the Australian Open was scheduled to get underway, Chief Justice James Allsop handed down orders that put Djokovic on a flight back home last night.

“This is not an appeal against the decision of the executive government,” Justice Allsop told the court. “It is an application to the court as a separate arm of government being the Commonwealth judicial branch to review a decision by a member of executive, the minister, for the lawfulness or legality of the decision on the three grounds put forward.

“These grounds focus on whether decision was, for different reasons, irrational or legally unreasonable. It is no part or function of the court to decide upon the merit or wisdom of the decision.”

The decision was unanimous and full reasons will be published at a later date. Djokovic was ordered to pay costs.

Justice Allsop said he does not believe any further orders are necessary.

Djokovic was scheduled to get his Australian Open campaign underway at Rod Laver Arena on Monday night, but he has been replaced in the draw by “lucky loser”, world No. 150 Salvatore Caruso.

The Serbian’s departure means Spanish phenomenon Rafael Nadal is the only member of the “Big Three” in the grand slam draw, with Roger Federer missing through injury.

Plenty of people were confused with the decision.

‘Assassination attempt’: Parties respond after court ruling

Djokovic’s dad Srdjan slammed the decision to send his son packing in an Instagram post. “The assassination attempt on the best sportsman in the world is over, 50 bullets to Novak’s chest. See you in Paris (at the French Open),” he wrote.

Djokovic released a statement soon after the verdict was handed down, claiming he was “extremely disappointed” with the outcome.

“I’d like to make a brief statement to address the outcomes of today’s Court hearing,” he said. “I will now be taking some time to rest and to recuperate, before making any further comments beyond this.

“I am extremely disappointed with the ruling to dismiss my application for judicial review of the decision to cancel my visa, which means I cannot stay in Australia and participate in the Australian Open. I respect the Court’s ruling and I’ll co-operate with the relevant authorities in relation to my departure from Aus.

“I am uncomfortable that the focus of the past weeks has been on me and I hope that we can all now focus on the game and tournament I love. I would like to wish the players, tournament officials, staff, volunteers and fans all the best for the tournament.

“Finally, I would like to thank my family, friends, team, supporters, fans and my fellow Serbians for your continued support. You have all been a great source of strength to me.”

Serbia’s Novak Djokovic as he arrives at the Lawyer's office. Picture: AAP Image/James Ross

The ATP — the governing body of men’s tennis — also released a statement, which read: “Today’s decision to uphold Novak Djokovic’s Australian visa cancellation marks the end of a deeply regrettable series of events.

“Ultimately, decisions of legal authorities regarding matters of public health must be respected. More time is required to take stock of the facts and to take the learnings from this situation.

“Irrespective of how this point has been reached, Novak is one of our sport’s greatest champions and his absence from the Australian Open is a loss for the game.

“We know how turbulent the recent days have been for Novak and how much he wanted to defend his title in Melbourne. We wish him well and look forward to seeing him back on court soon.

“ATP continues to strongly recommend vaccination to all players.”

Mr Hawke also responded late on Sunday night. “I welcome today’s unanimous decision by the Full Federal Court if Australia, upholding my decision to exercise my power under the Migration Act to cancel Mr Novak Djokovic’s visa in the public interest,” he said.

“Australia’s strong border protection policies have kept us safe during the pandemic, resulting in one of the lowest death rates, strongest economic recoveries, and highest vaccination rates in the world. Strong border protection policies are also fundamental to safe-guarding Australia’s social cohesion which continues to strengthen during the pandemic.

“Australians have made great sacrifices to get to this point and the Morrison Government is firmly committed to protecting this position, as the Australian people expect.”

How Sunday’s hearing played out

On Friday, Mr Hawke made the call to deport Djokovic from Australia “on health and good order grounds, on the basis that it was in the public interest to do so”. The minster used his personal power to overturn a decision in the Federal Circuit Court last Monday that allowed Djokovic to remain in the country.

On Sunday, the Serbian superstar’s lawyer said the minister’s reasons for trying to kick out Djokovic were “wrong,” “extremely weak,” and “irrational”.

Nick Wood QC, for Djokovic, questioned Mr Hawke’s apparent reliance on a single news article to judge Djokovic’s views, and his assertion that the 20-time major winner will stir up anti-vax sentiment if he remains in Australia. Indeed, they have said his departure could generate even more negative attitudes towards jabs.

But the minister’s solicitor said Djokovic’s views were well-known and he was an “icon for the anti-vaccination groups”.

A comment from one of the three judges, who said it was “common sense” that the minister did not have to list every source to ascertain Djokovic’s feelings towards vaccinations, could be considered a blow for the tennis player and may help the Government’s case.

The case was heard by a full bench of the Federal Court of Australia, comprised of Chief Justice James Allsop, Justice Anthony Besanko and Justice David O’Callaghan.

All eyes are on Novak Djokovic. (Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)

Government lawyers make their case

Lawyers for Novak Djokovic have been trying to persuade the three judges that much of the minister Hawke’s reason for barring the tennis star was down to alleged anti-vaccination comments and that he used a single BBC News article (see below for more on this) to make this case.

They have argued the quote from the article used by the minister was “selective” and “misleading”.

But in what could be a blow for the world No 1’s legal team, Justice James Allsop has said the minister can also draw on “rational and reasonable use of perception and common sense” in determining Djokovic’s views.

So while Djokovic’s team is relying heavily on essentially throwing out the BBC article, one of the three judges has said the minister can assume the Serbian has anti-vaccination tendencies based on far more than one story and the minister doesn’t have to lay out all the sources for that conclusion.

This is part of the text from the much-discussed BBC article.

That’s a huge help to Stephen Lloyd, the QC for the minister, who laid out the government’s case for why the visa cancellation should stand.

He has said Djokovic’s vaccination stance is indeed based on more than one quote in one article.

“It’s not just the applicant’s public statements that he is opposed to vaccination, it is the fact of his ongoing non-vaccinated status,” Mr Lloyd said.

“He could have been vaccinated if he wanted to be”.

Mr Lloyd has backed up the minister’s view that Djokovic’s mere presence in Australia could whip up anti-vax sentiment.

“The concern is that he’s a high profile person and in many respects a role model so that his presence in Australia would present more strongly to Australians his anti-vaccination views,” Mr Lloyd said.

“The applicant has a history of ignoring safety measures.

“When he was infected he undertook an interview and a photo shoot [that’s the now infamous L’Equipe interview] which included taking his mask off and the minister took the view his presence in Australia would encourage people to emulate his apparent disregard for those kinds of safety measures.”

Immigration minister Alex Hawke’s reasons fro cancelling Djokovic’s visa are under scrutiny. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Martin Ollman

Mr Lloyd said Djokovic was a known “icon” for anti-vaxxers.

He made that statement as he was being quizzed by Justice James Allsop on whether the minister had provided enough proof that the tennis star was indeed someone anti-vaxxers looked up to.

Mr Lloyd said it was “common sense” and “uncontroversial” that celebrities could influence people, after all that’s why advertisers paid them to spruik their products.

He called Djokovic an “icon” on at least three occasions.

“The applicant’s views on vaccination are widely understood. So the minister has to make a decision about the risk in regard to how he has become an icon for the anti-vaccination groups,” Mr Lloyd said.

Justice Allsop also pressed Mr Lloyd on a point raised by Djokovic’s team, that while the minister had raised the issue of how anti-vaxxers might be emboldened by the star’s presence the “counter factual” argument wasn’t investigated as to what the impact might be to the same people if Djokovic was sent packing.

Mr Lloyd said Australia was not “bound to suffer” someone’s presence out of concern of what might occur after they left.

‘Grasping at straws’: Djokovic’s lawyers make their case

Will he or won’t he play? (Photo by Kelly Defina/Getty Images)

Lawyers for Novak Djokovic have tried to demolish the reasons for cancelling the tennis champ’s visa saying they were “wrong,” “extremely weak,” and “irrational”.

Nick Wood SC, representing Djokovic, on Sunday said the statement of reasons given by Immigration Minister Alex Hawke regarding the visa cancellation were “grasping at straws”.

“The Minister tries to cut us off at the knees,” Mr Wood said at today’s hearing, referring to the reference to Djokovic potentially being a rallying point for those against vaccination.

But Mr Wood argued that the Minister overreached in this explanation and that the visa cancellation was “irrational, logical and unreasonable” as it could actually stir up anti-vax sentiment more than the Serb remaining in Australia.

“The proposition we put is it’s quite obvious that (cancelling the visa) might be apt to generate anti-vax sentiment and the evidence before the minster went that way,” Mr Wood said.

“Not a single line of evidence in the material before the Minister provided any … foundation whatsoever for the proposition that the mere presence of Mr Djokovic … in Australia may somehow, to use the minister’s expression, ‘foster anti vaccination sentiment’”.

Djokovic’s legal team has also delved into a BBC News article cited by the minister in his reason to cancel the visa.

The article headlined What has Novak Djokovic actually said about vaccines? was published on January 6.

A line in the article said: “In April 2020, well before Covid vaccines were available, Djokovic said he was ‘opposed to vaccination’.”

However Djokovic’s legal team has said this passage was “selectively” chosen by the minister and was “somewhat misleading”.

They pointed out that just under that line was another that said Djokovic “later clarified his position by adding that he was ‘no expert’ and would keep an ‘open mind’ but wanted to have ‘an option to choose what’s best for my body’.”

Another line also stated that “Djokovic has never explicitly come out in support of (the anti-vaxxers’) more extreme positions”. But this section was not mentioned by minister Hawke in his reasons to cancel the visa.

Mr Wood said it was “plainly wrong” to rely on one line to show that Djokovic was an anti-vax hero.

“It was irrational for the Minister to only contemplate the prospect of the fostering of anti-vax sentiment that might accrue from Mr Djokovic playing tennis and yet not consider the binary alternative, which was the prospect of anti-vax sentiment being fostered by … coercive state action.”

“The Minister is grasping at straws,” said Mr Wood, who added that elements of the cancellation reasons were “extremely weak” and there were “elementary errors” by Minister Hawke when he referred to press reports — some of which did not cite Djokovic at all.

With AFP