As I understand it, the visa he was granted does not allow any exemption from the vaccination requirement for any reason.
Whether that was his team’s blunder for applying for the wrong visa type I have no idea, as yet.
I will accept medical exemptions as an excuse to act as if there was no Covid epidemic the day such exemptions provide a magic shield that prevents the transmission of Covid.
From what I can glean from the government website, there is such a thing as a “Special Purpose Visa” which means you’ve officially been invited by the government, and it doesn’t say it requires full vaccination. All the other sorts of visa appear to require full vaccination.
To enter Victoria as such, you need vaccination or a medical exemption - I expect that’s where the “had covid before” part comes in.
Aqua?
The article I read said that the exemption for having had covid is specific to having had it in the past 6 months. Djokovic had it over a year ago in the summer of 2020. I don’t think there have been any reports of him having it again.
Also, the article said that applications are made anonymous for medical review, so there was no special treatment, but it also said that federal officials said they require documentation to be provided on arrival.
So I’m wondering if he indicated that he’d had covid in the last 6 months, but then could not provide documentation of that.
Normal saline, I think.
Yes. Some countries require vaccination by a vaccine on their approved list.
OMG! What a horrible allergy to have!
Definitely not worth crying over!
Be a real bitch, given all those sports drinks he quaffs court side for the sponsorship dosh.
I’ve heard that contains sodium, a metal that produces explosive hydrogen when exposed to water, and Chlorine, which will kill you if inhaled. Very dangerous stuff.
And don’t get me started about Dihydrogen Monoxide!
It is not Novak Djokovic who is said to be allergic to all covid vaccines, but Aaron Rodgers, who is an American football player. If he drinks sports drinks, it won’t be courtside.
From what I read, Djokovic sought a vaccination exemption on the basis that he has had PCR-confirmed SARS-Cov-19 infection within the past six months (and therefore has natural immunity and doesn’t need to be vaccinated until the six months expires). But he was denied entry because he was unable to substantiate the claim of having been infected within the past six months.
I saw this.
But it looks like at some point a panel of doctors representing the State of Victoria approved his exemption. Sounds like there’s some furious backpedaling going on somewhere.
And as an aside, this bit is puzzling to me:
The Victoria state government said it had refused to formally support Djokovic’s visa application
Is that how it usually works in Australia? If you fly into the USA, it will be agents of the Federal government who will decide if you get to leave the airport or not; the government of the particular State you’re flying into has no say in the matter.
As noted earlier in this thread, Australia restricts travel from state to state during the pandemic, even for Australian citizens. So, it would make sense if entry to a state required approval from the state government. Just my assumption.
In the USA, interstate travel is completely unrestricted, so it would be the federal government who handles entry.
Ah yes, that makes perfect sense.
Kind of wishing our States had the power to keep other States’ unvaxxed riffraff out.
That’s got nothing to do with visas, though. The interstate travel restrictions applied by state governments don’t work by getting the federal government to deny visas to anyone. Bear in mind that most of the people affected by the interstate travel restrictions don’t need visas because they are already in Australia, so you need other mechanism to police interstate travel restrictions.
What’s going on here is different. In general, migration/visas are a federal responsibility and state governments are not involved. The visa system is, however, insanely complicated and there are some visa classes under which you seek entry based on some public interest in having you in Australia, and for some of those visa classes state governments may be involved in affirming that, yes, we think it’s in the public interest for this applicant to be granted this visa, and here’s why.
At a wild guess, Djokovic held a visa of a class that didn’t involve any input by state governments, but when the feds decided that they would or might cancel that visa, they anticipated that he might then apply for a visa of a different class that did involve state government input, relying on the Victorian government to say yeah, we support Djokovic’s application because we reckon it’s in the interests of the people of Victoria for the Australian Open to include the world’s number 1 male player. So they asked the Victorian government whether, if Djokovic did apply for such a visa, the Victorian government would support it the application. And the Victorian government said no, they wouldn’t. But it was all hypothetical at that point because Djokovic hadn’t applied for a different visa.
As far as i can make out, the thing here is that Djokovic needs two things:
-
Permission to enter Australia, granted by the Feds (in some circumstances involving input from the State Government)
-
Permission to be out and about in Victoria/participate in the Australian Open, granted by the Victorian government.
Both permissions would ordinarily require vaccination, and Djokovic (who is unvaccinated) therefore needed an exemption. There are published medical criteria for granting exemptions which both the Fed and the State government applied to decide whether he would get an exemption or not. The Victorian government decided that he would, and therefore gave him permission to participate in the Australian Open. The Feds, presumably on the same facts and the same evidence, decided that he would not, and so denied him a visa to enter Australia.
I have an allergy to salt water. However, not as an injected substance, just as a minor skin irritation*.
*Yes, that means I am allergic to my own sweat
Essentially the same applies here. International movement into Australia is under the authority of the Federal Government. There is no specific constitutional right of free movement between states. Whatever limits exist for internal movement within and between states is under the authority of the individual states
Prior to Federation the largest Australian state NSW was free trade, Victoria was protectionist. The question of protectionism or free trade was one of the primary political schisms in Australia post Federation in 1901. Both the Protectionist Party and the Free Trade Party formed governments in the post Federation period.
Generally speaking the free traders won.
The two most relevant sections of the Australian Constitution here are section 92 and section 117.
Section 92
On the imposition of uniform duties of customs, trade, commerce, and intercourse among the States, whether by means of internal carriage or ocean navigation, shall be absolutely free.
This is taken as a protection of the right of free movement.
This section has seen some bruising High Court challenges especially in regard to commerce, but has generally been upheld
Section 117
A subject of the Queen, resident in any State, shall not be subject in any other State to any disability or discrimination which would not be equally applicable to him if he were a subject of the Queen resident in such other state.
There is minimal case law referencing section 117
However there are statutory exceptions to the free internal movement and consistency between the states for purposes of welfare, voting, security and public health etc.
Previously borders have been closed eg to prevent the spread of ‘pneumonic influenza’ or Spanish Flu in 1919.
Someone check Djoker’s “gluten problem” and what he used to get over it. That might explain how he went from being a player with known stamina issues to a fucking duracell.
I bet the “cure”, whatever it is it causes allergy to Covid vaccines.