Wrong kieran, i’m following the court proceedings and the government’s case is 100% that they think djokovic is a ‘future threat’ and a public danger. Their core argument is that if he stays, there may be unrest and anti-vaxer sentiment will be validated. You and moxie are totally wrong about what government’s argument is, they don’t even seem to focus on past crimes, as you put it or the visa app errors or even questioning the exemption. I find this very interesting, maybe they thought this wasn’t a good route to take.
The djokovic lawyers tried to tear this to shreds so they are not looking for loopholes but attacking the Government’s arguments at their core. They basically argued that kicking djokovic out could also lead to unrest, that his stance on vaccines hasn’t created ‘unrest’ anywhere else and that alex hawke was bringing up statements djoker made 2 years ago but not asking djoker what his stance is today.
the government lawyer is trying to dismiss what djoker lawyers stated and that it’s in public interest to deport him.
this will be the case, not the visa erros or exemption but whether the judges believe alex hawke’s reasoning that novak is some sort of danger to Australia’s civil state is valid or not. It’s a strange argument to make, i’m surprised government is making it about this. Seems it’s easier for djoker’s lawyers to destruct but will be up to the judges. Covid has been very messy in australia so judges may take that into consideration and agree djokovic’s presence threatens order, stability or containment of covid. I’m still very surprised alex hawke used this reasoning.
