Skip to content

Novak Djokovic prepares to pay the price for ‘turning a blind eye’ as new Australian Open case emerges | tennis

Novak Djokovic received a blow to his chances of returning to the Australian Open in January after a court suggested he showed ‘disregard’ of Covid rules when returning another’s visa tennis player. His visa as world number 7 was twice revoked and eventually expelled on the eve of the tournament in January, and he may now be banned from obtaining a new visa for the country for up to three years.

Djokovic was best known for arriving in Melbourne on a medical exemption from the Australian Open in January, but was stopped at the border and, in a week-long ordeal, his visa was revoked twice and spent time in a government detention hotel before being deported. By losing his visa, the 35-year-old was automatically given a three-year ban from being granted to anyone else in the country.

Travelers can still lift the ban, as another tennis player recently did in a court hearing. Renata Vorakova arrived in Australia at the end of December with a waiver proving she could not get vaccinated and even played a doubles match before Djokovic’s visa was revoked. Others who had been exempted from the Open from Australia also lost their papers and were asked to leave the country.

The Czech player was one of those exempted from voluntarily leaving the country after losing her visa and has now been reinstated to be allowed to return to the Australian Open in January, but while the decision is made, the vice -president and chief justice are in charge. The Immigration and Refugee Department has slammed Djokovic and admitted the world No.7 will pay for his attitude towards vaccination and isolation.

JUST IN: Nadal mulls retirement plans ahead of US Open injury return

“I also note, in full, that the case of Ms. Voracova . can be distinguished [the] Djokovic [case] Summarizing the hearing, Jan Redfern wrote, according to The Age, that his visa had not been revoked on grounds of “good order” and that the circumstances of his case did not lend itself to such a conclusion.

She took aim at the nine-time Australian Open champion and added: “As [already] Note that Ms Voracova is not against vaccination and, unlike the Djokovic case where the minister apparently found evidence that Mr Djokovic showed disregard for self-isolation protocols, there is no such evidence before me for that in this case. ”

When Djokovic’s visa was first revoked due to his medical exemption, he was fired after an appeal as it was found he had tested positive in December and could qualify for not having received the vaccine having recently recovered from infection. But it was repealed for the second and last time a few days later “for reasons of good order” by the immigration services.

don’t miss
Osaka confirms return to tennis after beating Wimbledon by points
Carlos Alcaraz talks about Wimbledon woes as tennis’ next big hope
Russian TV presenter disqualified for criticizing ‘weak’ co-star over Kasatkina video

The Serb attempted a second appeal hearing, but the judge concluded that his attendance would be ‘raven with anti-vaccination sentiment’ because Djokovic did not want to be vaccinated for reasons other than his recent positive test and did not failed to properly isolate him when he tested positive in December.

And it looks like he will have a much harder time regaining his ability to travel to Australia than Voracova, which could rule him out of the tournament for the second straight year. Redfern spoke about the case of the double WTA world number 102: “She responded honestly to the travel authorization and has convincing medical evidence to support her exemption, which is the evidence provided by her general practitioner regarding her exposure to thrombosis .

Notably, Ms. Voracova did not need to rely on the fact that she had previously contracted COVID-19 as a medical contraindication to vaccination because she had a medical basis for delaying vaccination.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.