An Australian newspaper claims to have obtained a more detailed explanation for why Novak Djokovic has had his visa to enter the country personally cancelled by Immigration Minister Alex Hawke.

Djokovic now faces deportation again, the latest twist in the ongoing saga over whether the No. 1-ranked tennis player will be allowed to compete in the Australian Open despite being unvaccinated for Covid-19.

Immigration Minister Alex Hawke said Friday he canceled the 34-year-old Serb's visa on public interest grounds — just three days before play begins at the Australian Open, where Djokovic has won a record nine of his 20 Grand Slam titles.

In a public statement released by Hawke on Friday night, he said he canceled the visa on "health and good order grounds, on the basis that it was in the public interest to do so." His statement added that Prime Minister Scott Morrison's government "is firmly committed to protecting Australia's borders, particularly in relation to the Covid-19 pandemic."

However, The Age claims to have secured more context to Hawke's decision that revolves around the situation's potential to enable increased anti-vaccination sentiment amongst the Australian public.

According to The Age, Hawke describes Djokovic as a "high profile unvaccinated individual" who has publicly indicated his opposition to vaccinations as well as "apparent disregard" for basic government laws, such as isolating after a positive test.

"Given Mr Djokovic's high-profile status and position as a role model in the sporting and broader community, his ongoing presence in Australia may foster similar disregard for the precautionary requirements following receipt of a positive Covid-19 test in Australia," Hawke wrote.

"In particular, his behaviour may encourage or influence others to emulate his prior conduct and fail to comply with appropriate health measures following a positive Covid-19 test, which itself could lead to the transmission of the disease and serious risk to their health and others.″⁣

Djokovic this week admitted he had gone out in public and attended a media interview with the French publication L'Equipe after testing positive for Covid-19 in Serbia. Mr Hawke cites that conduct to bolster his argument.

The argument Border Force officials used to rescind Djokovic's visa the first time – that his recent Covid infection in mid-December was insufficient to earn him an exemption to the requirement that incoming travellers be vaccinated against Covid – has been abandoned.

"I consider that Mr Djokovic's ongoing presence in Australia may lead to an increase in anti-vaccination sentiment generated in the Australian community, potentially leading to an increase in civil unrest of the kind previously experienced in Australia with rallies and protests which may themselves be a source of community transmission," Hawke added

The minister concluded: "These matters go to the very preservation of life and health of many members of the general community and further are crucial to the maintaining the health system in Australia, which is facing increasing strain in the current circumstances of the pandemic."

On Friday evening, Djokovic's lawyer told the Federal Circuit and Family Court that government officials' fears were unfounded, claiming it would be wrong to "remove a man of good standing" from Australia.

His lawyer ridiculed Hawke for, in his view, worrying that Djokovic's presence at the Australian Open could inflame anti-vaccination sentiment without considering the inflammatory effect deporting him might have.

"The Minister was making a binary decision. If he did not cancel Mr Djokovic's visa, then Mr Djokovic stays in Melbourne, plays in the Australian Open," he said.

"The binary alternative is that the Minister cancels Mr Djokovic's visa. That leads to the forcible, mandatory removal of this man of good standing who has complied with law, who poses a negligible risk to the community.

"The Minister only considers the potential for exciting anti-vax sentiment in the event that he's present.

"The Minister gives no consideration whatsoever to what effect (removing Djokovic) may have on anti-vax sentiment and indeed on public order. That seems patently irrational."

- with News.com.au and AP