Shocking details of Novak Djokovic’s interrogation at Melbourne airport emerge
Follow Us
Novak Djokovic
Novak Djokovic was detained at the Melbourne Airport upon his arrival in Wednesday, as the Serbian has seen his Australian Visa cancelled. The 34-year-old had applied for Australian Visa on the basis of medical exemption, but the Border Forces have cancelled his visa after hours of interrogation.
The Serbian arrived in Australia on Wednesday midnight, after a 14-hour long flight from Dubai. Court documents have shown the timeline of the investigation, as the Serbian was first questioned from 12:21 am to 12:41 am on Thursday morning.
At about 4:00 AM in the morning, the Serbian was told that he did not have the correct documents to apply for the exemption, hence his visa would be likely cancelled. The Serbian had then asked if he could rest until 8 AM, to which the officials agreed.
According to the court documents, the border officials said, “That’s absolutely fine, I have spoken with my supervisors and they’re more than happy to allow you have to rest (sic).”
Novak Djokovic was pressurized to accept the decision of Visa cancellation
Novak Djokovic had another conversation at around 6 AM, and went for a short nap around that time. The Serbian requested to rest until 8:30 AM, but officials cut short his nap, as they pressurized him to accept the decision of his visa cancellation.
At 7:42 AM, he finally accepted the decision, and was sent to the Carlton hotel in Melbourne, where he remains under hotel quarantine.
“Over several pages of transcript the supervisor pressured Mr Djokovic to simply continue the interview immediately,” Djokovic’s lawyers wrote in their submission. Mr Djokovic, having formed the view that “(they were) going to cancel (his) visa, it’s obvious’ relented, feeling he had no choice, and on the basis of an understanding based on what they had said to him that it was better for him if the interview was done right away,” the statement read.
“When one talks in terms of procedural fairness or natural justice, the concern of the law is to avoid practical injustice. Within statutory constraints, the Delegate was required to adopt a procedure that was reasonable in the circumstances to afford an opportunity to be heard to Mr Djokovic,” the statement added.
“If the procedure adopted so constrained Mr Djokovic’s opportunity to propound his case as to amount to practical injustice, that would amount to a denial of procedural fairness. In an analogous way, Mr Djokovic sought until 8:30 to rest and to speak with his advisers,” it added.
“The Delegate represented to Mr Djokovic that he could have that time. There was no cogent reason for the Delegate to depart from that representation — there was no prejudice to the Respondent in delay for a further few hours, Mr Djokovic’s request was reasonable and based on cogent reasons, and the consequences of a possible cancellation decision were very serious. Yet the Delegate did depart from that representation,” the statement concluded.
Also Read: Marin Cilic questions poor handling of Novak Djokovic saga
Stay Updated!
Nirmit Mehta
(2425 Articles Published)