Djokovic Deported — Has a Dangerous Precedent Been Set?

Have a look at the reasoning behind the Morrison Government's decision to deport Novak Djokovic and ask yourself, has a dangerous precedent been set?

According to the Morrison Government, some of the reasons Novak Djokovic's were that his presence in Australia may have posed "a health risk to the Australian community, in that his presence in Australia may foster anti-vaccination sentiment" and potentially lead to "an increase in civil unrest of the kind previously experienced in Australia with rallies and protests".


They argued this could take the form of the following:


  • "An increase in anti-vaccination sentiment being generated in the Australian community, leading to others refusing to become vaccinated or refusing to receive a booster vaccine."


  • "A reinforcing of the views of a minority in the Australian community who remain unvaccinated against COVID-19."


  • "People deciding to not receive a booster vaccine."


  • "Unvaccinated persons becoming very unwell and/or transmitting it to others."


  • "Increased pressure placed on the Australian health system."


Now that these justifications have been used to successfully deport Mr Djokovic, I want to know what you think.

Are you worried about how these types of arguments might be used by Governments in the future, not just against foreign nationals but against Australia's own citizens?

Has a dangerous precedent been set?


Read more here: The reasons why Djokovic's visa was cancelled for the second time

Be the first to comment

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.