Novak Djokovic was just doing his job, aiming for his tenth win at the Australian Open, when he was apprehended by Australian border control who revoked his visa and locked him up pending deportation within hours of his entering Australia.
Djokovic’s fight with the law is the same fight many Australians and New Zealanders have fought and lost under mandatory vaccination rules that contravene human rights law, but few have access to the legal remedy Djokovic used successfully to pursue his career and even fewer have his high media profile.
Djokovic appealed in court, won and was awarded costs. The judge criticised the very short time accorded his legal team to prepare their defence, saying “I’m quite agitated about this, what more could this man possibly have done?”
“By handling Djokovic’s case so badly, the Australian authorities have turned this into a test for the cause of natural justice and the championing of human rights.
“The judge asked not whether vaccination is a good idea, but what the tennis player should have done that he failed to do. There was no answer, leaving the judge ‘agitated’ by the tennis player’s ‘manifestly unjust’ treatment, as if he were a plague carrier requiring instant incarceration.
“At a time when authoritarian governments everywhere are riding roughshod over the rule of law, the Djokovic decision is an admittedly modest victory for its champions.”
Media were instrumental in convincing the Australian public that Djokovic broke the rules before his legal team even stepped into the courtroom. They reminded Australians of their suffering under repeated lockdowns; how they ‘chose’ to be vaccinated to keep everyone safe, neglecting to mention the coercion involved. Getting the jab to keep your job and restore a semblance of social life was viewed by the media as a perfectly reasonable demand for everyone, regardless of individual health circumstances.
The rules are for everyone, they argued, everyone suffers and so must Djokovic. Why should a privileged tennis player break the rules and enter Australia without proof of vaccination or a valid exemption certificate?
“Djokovic is unvaccinated and poses a risk to people and the health system in Australia, the government said in a 13-page document lodged with the court on Sunday.”
Until now Covid rule makers have gone unchallenged, wallowing like pigs in mud in their copious and contradictory edicts, but this high profile court case challenged their dubious authority and has the potential to end their piggish behaviour. But, despite the court ruling, Australian bureaucrats may yet put pressure on the immigration minister to overrule the judge and restore Djokovic’s visa ban.
But the damage is done. The repressed have got a whiff of freedom. The giants can be slain.
The Novak Djokovic-Australian Government saga is also a clash of tennis titans. Djokovic is at the top of the ATP tennis World Tour career prize money earnings at more than 153 million US dollars and is in a three-way tie with Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, each holding a record 20 Grand Slam singles titles.
Djokovic or Nadal could break the three-way tie in Australia in 2022 because Federer is recovering from knee surgery and unable to play this year’s Australian Open or Wimbledon.
But at most risk from the court decision is the durability of the Covid rules because it has been demonstrated that they may not be legally enforceable.
New Zealand’s ludicrous traffic light system (that no one understands) could be disregarded when people discover the legal redress available because their rights were trampled underfoot. The balance of power could swing from unlawful rule-makers back to the people – where it belongs.
“For every Djokovic at the gate there will be hundreds of thousands whose cases go unheard. Therein lies his relevance.”
The Guardian