(CNN)Three judges who unanimously rejected Novak Djokovic’s offer to stay in Australia to compete in the Australian Open have revealed their reasons for the verdict.
In a written statement, the judges said it was not irrational that Immigration Secretary Alex Hawke had shaken Djokovic out of concern that the unvaccinated Serbian star could pose a risk to public health and order.
The ruling said it was open to the minister to conclude that Djokovic’s presence could encourage anti-vax protests, which could aid the spread of Covid-19.
And they noted that the minister’s decision also included the star’s potential impact on people who were unsure about taking the vaccine.
“The possible influence on the second group comes from common sense and human experience: an iconic tennis world star can influence people of all ages, young or old, but perhaps especially the young and the impressionable, to emulate him. This is not imaginative; it doesn’t need evidence,” the verdict said.
The statement ends one of the most controversial episodes in Australian Open history.
The men’s No. 1 was forced to leave the country on the eve of the competition after the court failed to find fault with the Immigration Minister’s decision to annul his visa.
It was the second time Djokovic’s visa has been annulled – the first came in the hours after he arrived in Australia on January 5, when Australian Border Force (ABF) officials rejected his alleged exception to the rules, which say all New arrivals must be fully vaccinated.
Djokovic said a previous Covid infection meant he was exempt, but under federal rules that’s not enough and he was being held in an immigration facility.
The matter went to court and a single judge ruled that the decision was “unreasonable” because he was not given enough time to consult his lawyers. Djokovic was released from custody and resumed training at Melbourne Park in hopes of securing his 21st Grand Slam title.
However, days later the government intervened to have his visa canceled again, saying the unvaccinated player was a threat to public health and order. The matter was referred to a higher court and the three judges met last Sunday.
Djokovic’s legal team did not argue about the merits of the minister’s decision, only that he committed a jurisdictional error under the country’s immigration law.
On Sunday the judges ruled there was no fault and Djokovic agreed to go.
In a statement, the player said he was “disappointed” with the decision but respected the court’s decision. That night he left Melbourne en route to Serbia, where he was received a hero’s reception.
Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabic said Australia’s handling of the star was “scandalous”. Brnabic told CNN on Wednesday that she didn’t know why Djokovic wasn’t vaccinated, but added that she didn’t think he was anti-vaccination.
“He supports vaccinating those who want to be vaccinated. So I don’t see him as anti-vaccination,” she said.
In a statement shortly after Sunday’s verdict, Djokovic’s family blamed politics for the decision.
“This is not just a sports issue and playing in the first Grand Slam of the season, which has been dominated by Novak for a decade, but also politics as well as all interests that have taken precedence over sport,” the statement said.
Under Australian law, Djokovic can be banned from the country for three years, although Home Secretary Karen Andrews does not rule out an exception. “Every application will be checked for its merits,” she said earlier this week.
On Tuesday, Tennis Australia expressed regret that the visa dispute had distracted players from the tournament.
“We deeply regret the impact this has had on all players,” the statement said. “There are always lessons to be learned and we will review all aspects of our preparation and execution to inform our planning – as we do every year. This process always starts once the Australian Open champions have raised their trophies.”
The Grand Slam ends on January 31st.
Add Comment