On January 16, Beijing time, the dust settled on Djokovic's trip to Australia, and three judges of the Australian Federal Court unanimously ruled that Djokovic's visa was cancelled, and the men's tennis world number one was determined not to qualify for the 2022 Australian Open. The Australian media also carried out a more in-depth reason disclosure, why Djokovic, he must be bombed away? Here's the view of Australian journalist Grant.
Djokovic came to Australia to try to become the greatest player in the history of the men's tennis. The athlete, who earned $200 million in prize money with his racket talent, has amassed a wealth of prize money and endorsements over the course of his legendary career. But now Djokovic, whose name has been exploited by anti-vaccination campaigns, and while he has not contracted with these organisations and has not publicly backed their ideas, both Australian Immigration Minister Hawke and the government behind him have determined that Djokovic is now a "poster boy" with corrosive and dangerous ideas.
Lloyd, a senior lawyer for the Australian government, said Djokovic had now become an icon for anti-vaccination groups, who had been using high-level athletes to promote their ideas and causes, and that he had established a connection with a cause whether Djokovic wanted to or not. ”
Eight years ago, the Bundestag amended Australia's immigration laws to make it easier for the Immigration Minister to deport certain people, legally cancel Djokovic's visas, and Australian Immigration Minister Hawke can only be convinced that his presence will encourage the anti-vaccine mob. Djokovic's lawyer, Wood, argues that the evidence for Djokovic's presence undermines the pandemic response is very weak because it is based on Djokovic's comments about vaccines 2 years ago, as well as some strange ideas about mental strength, and some online articles about his wife's conspiracy theories.
Djokovic argues that Djokovic played tennis in the world for 1 year, 12 months and 11 months, where is the evidence that his presence fuels anti-vaccineism in the local country? Lloyd, a senior lawyer for the Australian government, argues that Djokovic's choice not to vaccinate shows his view that the action is loud enough.
Chief Justice Thorpe argued that the cancellation of Djokovic's visa could also lead to public discord and spread the risk through rallies. Lloyd argues that this is not a matter of concern to the courts and the government, and that for the sake of the public interest, there should be no fear of some follow-up reactions, thus being forced to accept the existence of foreigners. What happens next, says anti-vaccine activists are planning another chance for freedom, may be known on Tuesday. By then, Djokovic's Australian summer was over, and his reputation would plummet (Australian journalist Grant's point of view).