Djokovic plans to fight deportation in court

Melbourne – Novak Djokovic won his first legal round against Australian authorities who wanted to deport him. However, No. 1 in world tennis faces a formidable challenge in the second round of Sunday to undertake what is called the divine power of the Immigration Minister on visa and public interest issues.

Djokovic won his court’s appeal this week against the border authorities’ decision to revoke his visa. He overcame procedural errors related to Australia’s misleading COVID-19 vaccination regulations.

Friday’s immigration minister Alex Hawke’s intervention to cancel a visa as a “fundamentally different” reason for Djokovic’s lawyers to oppose Australian politics and law.

What is the power of the pastor?

Hawk has “personal authority” to revoke Djokovic’s visa under Section 133C of the 1958 Immigration Act.

Hawk needed to be satisfied that Djokovic’s presence in Australia “may or may be a risk to the health, security, or order of the Australian community.”


The minister also needed to convince that ordering Djokovic’s deportation would be “public interest,” a term without a legal definition.

Unlike the decisions of government supporters, the minister’s decision “does not apply the rules of natural justice.” This meant that the minister did not have to tell Djokovic that he was planning to deport.

Hawk may have secretly canceled Djokovic’s visa and informed a Serbian tennis star that he had to go a few days later. Had the Australian Border Forces detained Djokovic, they would have had to legally reveal that he did not have a visa.

Under Article 133F of the Act, Djokovic could request the Minister to overturn his decision, but the only viable option was to appeal in court.

How does the pastor use his power?

In the case of Djokovic, an Australian government lawyer warned that the judge plans to intervene on Monday when the visa is revived. The popularity of star athletes may have encouraged the government to even hand them over.


Djokovic’s lawyer provided evidence of why he was allowed to hold a visa and keep the Australian Open title in the days before the minister acted.

Hawk has the drastic discretion to define the public interest in canceling a visa, but he must also be thoughtful and detailed in his reasoning.

“These decisions are not easy. There are case laws that force the minister to actively engage in materials and decisions when exercising this authority personally,” said immigration lawyer Kian Bourne. I am saying.

“He (Hawk) can’t say in one liner:” Mr. Djokovic, the visa has been cancelled. “He had bureaucrats and officials write a decision for him and did it for two minutes. Look, you can’t approve it, “Bourne added.

How do you overturn the pastor’s decision?

The minister’s authority is so broad and discretionary that the reason for the appeal is potentially less than the decision of a civil servant to act under the minister’s authority. However, the court overturned the minister’s decision in the past.


The immigration minister’s authority is one of the broadest offered under Australian law, said Greg Barns, a lawyer who experienced the Visa case.

“One of the criticisms of this particular power is that it is so widespread that it effectively allows the minister to play God in someone’s life,” Burns said.

“Although it should not be done in theory, the concept of the public interest is so broad that the minister can effectively take into account political considerations, so political considerations form part of the decision. It is inevitable to do, “Burns added.

Political consideration is rising for the conservative coalition of Prime Minister Scott Morrison, who is scheduled to be elected by May at the latest.

Australia is one of the highest COVID-19 vaccination rates in the world, but the government is concerned about Djokovic’s popularity among those who oppose vaccination requirements and who are skeptical of vaccine efficacy. I am holding


Djokovic’s lawyers do not admit that these feelings are justified in denying sports star attempts at the record 21 Grand Slam titles.

Djokovic’s lawyer Nick Wood said at the Australian Open on Friday that “the minister is considering the possibility of exciting anti-vax sentiment only if he is present.”

According to Wood, Hawk’s reason does not take into account the potential impact on these attitudes if Djokovic is forcibly eliminated.

“The minister does not consider anything about anti-vax sentiment and how it could actually affect public order,” Wood said. “It obviously seems absurd.”

Copyright 2022 AP communication. all rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission.

Djokovic plans to fight deportation in court

Source link Djokovic plans to fight deportation in court

Back to top button