Jump to content

 

 

Recommended Posts

Djokovic is a well-known vaccine sceptic, so him publicly declaring that he had received an exemption and was travelling to Oz was a clear an example of virtue signalling... which served only to highlight to the world that he could well be using his profile to get around the rules that the Aussie population have had to endure.  


That population includes my aunt who was unable to leave to come back to Scotland to attend her father's funeral  before christmas.  Not that its about that per se, but it highlights why there is such annoyance in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was interesting to read that the Djokovic family press conference was cut short yesterday as soon as the questions turned to him attending public events after him allegedly testing positive on the 16th.   This story has more legs to go yet I reckon

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, stewarty said:

publicly declaring that he had received an exemption and was travelling to Oz was a clear an example of virtue signalling

Did he publicly declare it prior to the court case?  

 

The Australian government have been totally over the top with their Covid restrictions.  One would hope Australians will respond accordingly at the next election.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stewarty said:

Djokovic is a well-known vaccine sceptic, so him publicly declaring that he had received an exemption and was travelling to Oz was a clear an example of virtue signalling... which served only to highlight to the world that he could well be using his profile to get around the rules that the Aussie population have had to endure.  


...

It's not virtue signalling.

 

He holds the perceived low status opinion.

 

It is virtue signalling to make a show of criticising him publicly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to recall a poster saying terms like woke have been weaponised on the Woke Taxonomy thread.

 

One could say the same about the term virtue signalling here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gonzo79 said:

Did he publicly declare it prior to the court case?  

 

The Australian government have been totally over the top with their Covid restrictions.  One would hope Australians will respond accordingly at the next election.

yes.  he tweeted that he had exemption permission or something like that a few days before he travelled.  thats why it was picked up and all blew up whilst he was in the air.

Link to post
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, ranger_syntax said:

It's not virtue signalling.

 

He holds the perceived low status opinion.

 

It is virtue signalling to make a show of criticising him publicly.

its not a low status opinion in his opinion.  

 

besides, he knows that people know he isn't vaxxed.  

 

he also knows that not being vaxxed is an issue with regards to oz visas.

 

by making a show of "ive got an exemption", he's signalling that he's playing by the books and has moral authority.

 

the court has backed him up, so virtue signalling works!

 

 

 

 

Edited by stewarty
Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Gonzo79 said:

I seem to recall a poster saying terms like woke have been weaponised on the Woke Taxonomy thread.

 

One could say the same about the term virtue signalling here.

aha.  you've picked up my irony

Link to post
Share on other sites

HE's Novak Djokovic - HE does what HE wants!!

 

Well, perhaps not, there may be more to come, as there may be more to this than meets the eye....

 

Novak Djokovic may have given misleading information on immigration form

Star failed to disclose trip to Marbella before arriving in Australia

Bernard Lagan

Tuesday January 11 2022, 9.43am, The Times

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/judge-orders-novak-djokovics-release-xnbh3nksw

 

Novak Djokovic may have misled the Australian authorities about his movements before entering the country, it emerged today, triggering a new investigation by border officials which could result in him being sent back to a detention centre.

The tennis star is alleged to have made a false declaration when he said he had not travelled outside his Serbian homeland in the fortnight before he arrived in Australia last week.

It was revealed today that Djokovic appeared in Marbella, Spain, on January 2, prompting the fresh investigation.

Djokovic was pictured in Marbella on January 2

All visitors arriving in Australia are asked if they have “travelled or will travel in the 14 days prior to your flight to Australia”. They are also warned that “giving false or misleading information is a serious offence. You may also be liable to a civil penalty for giving false or misleading information”. The maximum penalty is 12 months’ imprisonment.

Djokovic told border officials that Tennis Australia — the organisers of next week’s Australian Open — had completed the Australian travel declaration on his behalf.

 

Alex Hawke, the immigration minister, has wide powers to cancel Djokovic’s visa on public health grounds. His office confirmed today that the minister was considering withdrawing his visa for a second time.

“As noted yesterday in the federal circuit and family court, minister Hawke is considering whether to cancel Mr Djokovic’s visa,” Hawke’s spokesperson said.

The tennis star, pictured with a fan in Marbella on January 2, is alleged to have made a false declaration when he said he had not travelled before flying to Australia

“In line with due process, minister Hawke will thoroughly consider the matter. As the issue is ongoing, for legal reasons it is inappropriate to comment further.”

Apparent irregularities have also been found in the Serbian certificate provided by Djokovic as evidence that he had tested positive for Covid-19 last month.

The document from the country’s Institute of Public Health states that Djokovic had a positive PCR test result on the evening of December 16.

It includes a QR code — a digital link in visual form — leading to a page on the institute’s website that was supposed to confirm the finding.

Several news outlets, including Der Spiegel, a German magazine, found that when they scanned the code yesterday it initially displayed a negative test result. Shortly afterwards, however, it began linking to a positive result instead.

It is unclear what caused the glitch. The Serbian Institute of Public Health has yet to respond to requests for an explanation.

 

If Djokovic loses his visa again and is deported, he faces a three-year ban on travel to Australia, jeopardising his ability to compete in future Opens, though the minister could elect to waive the ban.

The world No 1 was released from a Melbourne detention centre on Monday night after a judge found that Australian Border Force officers had denied him procedural fairness when they cancelled his visa after his arrival last Wednesday.

 

They alleged the Serbian champion could not show proof that he held a lawful exemption from vaccination against Covid-19. That contention was not tested in Monday’s court hearing. Djokovic was freed because he was denied proper access to a lawyer.

Scott Morrison, the Australian prime minister, discussed Djokovic’s situation with his Serbian counterpart, Ana Brnabic, late on Monday. Djokovic’s treatment in Australia has triggered an outcry in Serbia with President Vucic saying the tennis champion was the victim of a “political witch-hunt”.

Djokovic, who practised at the Australian Open’s Melbourne arena today, thanked the judge for overturning his visa cancellation after his release on Monday night.

The decision means the tennis player is now able to train in Melbourne

 

“I’m pleased and grateful,” Djokovic said. “Despite all that has happened, I want to stay and try and compete @australianopen. I remain focused on that.”

 

Djokovic’s mother, Dijana, said yesterday that the ruling was the “biggest victory” of her son’s career. His father, Srdjan, called on the Queen to protect his son’s human rights.

At a press conference with the television network Prva in Belgrade, Serbia, Mrs Djokovic said: “Thank you for coming. We’re here to celebrate our son Novak, a boy who in his family learnt not to put up with lies and cheating. He always fought for justice. He’s done nothing wrong, he hasn’t broken any of their laws and he was subjected to torture, to harassment.”

 

Earlier, as the tennis player left his lawyers’ building, his car was overwhelmed by jubilant supporters, causing police to use pepper spray to disperse the crowd.

 

The live stream of Monday’s hearing repeatedly crashed as tennis fans around the world tried to watch.

Djokovic’s lawyers have argued that he was given assurances by the Australian Open’s organiser, Tennis Australia, that his Covid-19 infection last month would allow him a medical exemption to being vaccinated. He also received an email from the Australian government saying he had met the requirements for quarantine-free arrival, his lawyers added.

 

The Novak Djokovic legal situation — explained

 

What is Novak Djokovic’s present legal status as the Serbian tennis ace jousts for the right to battle to extend his run of dominance at the Australian Open?
Still tenuous. Anthony Kelly, a federal circuit judge, was sympathetic to an extent, ruling that Djokovic’s visa should be temporarily reinstated. The judge said that border officials had behaved unfairly by not providing the star with time to take legal advice before they revoked his entry visa to the country.

 

Were there any wider legal arguments?
Djokovic’s lawyers said that the country’s medical authorities have ruled that people who have been infected with Covid within six months can receive a temporary exemption to the vaccination rule.

At the hearing, Judge Kelly noted that Djokovic had provided officials at Melbourne’s airport with a medical exemption issued by both Tennis Australia and two medical panels. The judge said in court: “The point I’m somewhat agitated about is what more could this man have done?”

But ultimately the visa was reinstated because government lawyers conceded that the decision to proceed with interviewing Djokovic in the early hours of Thursday and cancel his visa before he could contact Tennis Australia or his lawyers was unreasonable.

 

Does that mean Djokovic is free to play?
He will be at least getting a few knock-up rounds on the practice court. The judge ordered the government to release the Serb from a Melbourne quarantine hotel where he had spent four nights. Djokovic posted a photograph on Twitter that showed him and his team standing on one of the tournament’s main show courts this evening.

 

Game, set and match to the world number 1 — in the law courts at least?
Well, first set, perhaps, but this looks like it is destined to be a five-set thriller. A lawyer for Australia’s minister for immigration, Alex Hawke, stated that the government was “actively” considering re-detaining Djokovic tomorrow. Under the country’s Migration Act, the minister has wide powers — beyond those used by the Australian Border Force — to revoke visas.

 

Seems a bit hardball – what’s the Aussie government’s legal ground?
According to Canberra’s written submissions to the hearing, Djokovic’s legal team relied on outdated government advice to back his claim that he was exempt from the vaccination rule. Ministers argue that a previous Covid-19 infection in itself no longer constitutes valid grounds for a vaccination exemption. Victoria state officials meanwhile agreed that it counted as an exemption.

Lawyers for Karen Andrews, Australia’s home affairs minister, said that the vaccination exemption could only be granted for travellers who had recovered from a serious bout of the virus — and there is no suggestion that Djokovic had acute illness when he tested positive for the coronavirus last month.

 

What is the next legal move?
If the Australian ministers revoke his visa again — and according to a spokesman a decision is still in the balance — it would be up to Djokivic and his legal team to decide whether to bat the ball back to the law courts.

 

What are the risks for Djokovic if the case returns to court . . . and he loses?
Felicity Gerry QC, an English lawyer who works in Australia, points out that Djokovic is currently in Australia legally under the terms of his visa but “the personal power of the minister is wide so a challenge in the courts of any move by the government to revoke might well be tough. Therefore, he must weigh his position carefully as if he were deported, he would face a three-year ban on entering the country.”

 

Could there be a compromise?
Yes, says Gerry, a deal could be done that allows Djokovic to keep the visa for the length of the tournament, while attaching additional restrictions to it.

 

Jonathan Ames, Legal Editor

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.