From other sources; His medical exception was approved, so he hopped on a plane, and mid flight Morrison’s government had a change of mind now blaming Victorian Government and Tennis Australia for giving Djokovic a pass.
Curious what the actual structure of the "permit" looks like. E.g. that article says
> On Tuesday, the Australian Open announced that it had given the player a medical exemption,
which to me reads like the tournament approved it. Which I guess it has to do if it enforces the rule otherwise for participants, but why does that matter for the visa (except that he needs to play the tournament to get a visa for the tournament of course)? Was there some explicit agreement along the lines of "we approve your decision process, and then will allow everybody you accept in", was it just an expectation that immigration would accept the same standard, ...?
EDIT2: https://www.theage.com.au/national/visa-bungle-delays-novak-... also reads similar. So unless there's something missing in that reporting (quite possible), it doesn't really sound like "he got permission and then they changed their mind" quite fits what's going on? But rather "it was approved tournament-side and assumed whatever he provided there would also be enough for the visa, turns out it isn't/he asked for the wrong visa/..."? Especially for comparison with other people with exemptions it sounds like details that aren't public matter, i.e. the specific documentation provided.
It's a victory for misery's love of company, and little else. He's not suddenly going to find Jesus and promote vaccines for those sweet Australian dollars; he's just going to get annoyed that he was jerked around.
Everywhere rich and famous getting special treatment. So, it is NOT just affecting ordinary Aussies. There is a reason for Squid Games being so popular.
The details of this are obscure, due to medical privacy, and I don't know more than anyone else.
On the other hand, this isn't the first time that someone has arrived in Australia with a visa, been taken aside at the airport, questioned by immigration officials, and told to leave the country. The usual reason it happens is when the immigration officials suspect that the person told some some fibs on their visa application. To my ears, "failed to provide adequate documentation" sounds very much like a euphemism for "told us a pack of porkies." This would explain the confusion over what the Immigration Department and the Victorian Government discussed after he arrived, and the Victorian Government's rush to distance themselves from him after that discussion.
This retired immigration official makes a good point: if Djokovic was suspected of doing anything dodgy, there were lots of opportunities to question him before he boarded a plane. To that extent, it's an Australian stuff up. And the immigration authorities are notorious for stuff ups.
More cynically, this is a great opportunity for the most dishonest prime minister, and most corrupt government, in recent Australian history to put on some theatre about their respect for the rule of law.
Low but that isn't the point. Given the restrictions ordinary Australians have lived under and the vaccination rate (90%+ of those eligible) it's simply politically untenable to allow someone to bypass the entry rules.
It's not like Australia hasn't been utterly clear on its stance for months, he had plenty of time to remediate his vaccination status.
Why wouldn't PCR test and isolation be enough? Besides with Omicron spread risk is not really reduced. Seems irrational decisionmaking to me and more of a power move.
Somewhat. If he had kept his exemption status private and had the appropriate documentation to support it there is a good chance he could have entered the country without fanfare. I think the problem stems from the fact that a) that documentation wasn't up to the level expected at entry and b) he and his associates made a big deal about his vaccination status, thus making it impossible for the government to make a special exemption - atleast without the support of the Victorian state government which had already made it abundantly clear the price of such endorsement was being fully vaccinated.
He said he started feeling big pains on his entire body, which does sound odd, but honestly I don't know if he's speaking truth. Do you think he just wanted an excuse not to play, or what was his reasoning to pretend to be vaccine injured?
He certainly is a liar, besides a very prominent vaccination denier.
His medical exemption is based on a positive PCR test from Dec 16. The deadline for such an exemption was Dec 10, so legally too late. But now the best. On the very same Dec 16 he had a public appearance in Serbia, and then Dec 17 another. Where he should have been in quarantine already.
Why if there are non-zero risks for his career (looking at Jeremy Chardy) and he already has natural imunity? Why would be the vaccine deemed superior? Last data for Australia is 65k new cases in a day? For a highly vaccinated country? Numbers don’t really add up. Australia’s government has both draconian and innefective measures, which is quite a feat.
Btw. I’m vaccinated and always promote it to people who didn’t catch it yet. But if you already had it? It’s not as clear, and we have number of studies to show it.
Although Djokovic is my countrymen I’m not pissed about him mission Australian Open (not a tennis fan). I’m pissed at all the governments around the world who make illogical rules just for the optics that they’re doing something. Lke closing borders when both countries have similar infection levels, or not recognizing vaccines if they are from other country you have political issues with. Or demanding vaccination even if there was prior infection and antibodies still present.
Or, like Australia, using imigration rules designed for zero-covid scenario in situation when they have internal 65k new cases in a day.
It would undermine official position. You cant have special cases when you make spectacle out of "doing the right thing", even if that thing was already proven to be useless (vaccination preventing spread in case of catching covid, or even preventing infection in case of Omicron in the first place).
This isn't a random government. It's the government of the host country of an international event. Just because it's an international event it doesn't invalidate the sovereignty of the host nation. In this case Australia is rightfully enforcing it's border rules.
You might disagree with Australia's policies but they are created by lawfully elected representatives of the Australian people. Attempting to ignore or bypass these policies is actually impinging on the freedom of ordinary Australians to have their voices heard and their safety protected by their elected government.
Support him how? Support him as a tennis player, or support him being allowed into Australia?
He can uphold his bodily integrity by leaving the country without being vaccinated. Nobody is compelling him to have the jab.
It's a reasonable condition particularly because most Australians are by virtue of employment restrictions are required to be vaccinated. It would be unfair to have one rule for celebrities and another for ordinary people.
I don't think anyone should legitimise a country that bans its owns citizens from entering it, detains refugees on islands and is generally backwards, racist and repressive.
They didn't. The state made it clear they wouldn't sponsor his visa if he arrived unvaccinated unless he had at the time of arrival documentation of his case for exemption. Clearly he failed to furnish either vaccination or appropriate exemption documentation at entry. As I said if he was serious about competing he wouldn't take the chance and would have gotten vaccinated just like everyone else that wants to come to Australia for any other purpose. He already gets special treatment and entry when others aren't able to travel here, the least he can do is follow the rules.
He gets special treatment and entry because Australia decided to host an _international_ sporting event during a pandemic. If health is so important to the government, they should have just canceled the event, or make it only national.
Yes he gets a chance at entry when all other non-citizens are denied even the chance.
That doesn't mean he gets to ignore all the rules, if anything because he has been offered such a privilege he should go above and beyond to follow the rules.
It's like being invited to someones home that has a shoes off policy and refusing to take your shoes off because it "violates your freedoms". Then them offering an exemption if you show a medical reason for needing to keep your shoes on followed by you telling them to go shove it when you actually arrive. Is it surprising when they decline to let you into their home?
Why wouldn't PCR test and isolation be enough? Besides with Omicron spread risk is not really reduced. Seems irrational decisionmaking to me and more of a power move.
Because the rules are the same for everyone. You are either double vaccinated at least 14 days before arrival or you have a qualifying medical exemption.
You are free to disagree with the rules (and not come to Australia) but you can't just ignore them.
No. The rules are incompatible with people that refuse vaccination being entered into international sporting events on Australian soil.
This doesn't appear to be a big loss or problem as the ITF has fully supported the Australian Open.
If players wish to remain unvaccinated they are self-excluding themselves from international events - that is their choice. No one is forcing them to attend just as no one is forcing them to be vaccinated.
Australia only allows unvaccinated travelers that -can't- be vaccinated for medical reasons. Not wanting to be vaccinated or not "needing" to be vaccinated are not the same thing as -can't-.
No proof that vaccine will be harmful to your health == vaccine required for entry. Very simple.
The problem here is the conflict of interest. World No. 1 tennis player does not consider entry to Australia a privilege, worthy of taking a medical procedure which he does not have to perform otherwise.
Australia does not want to take many people in, and many people do not desire to enter Australia. But that ruins the idea of tournament. Which is based on assumption of admission on liberal terms.
https://news.yahoo.com/dennis-young-novak-djokovic-denied-22...