Djokovic case, when transparency matters more than privacy

It could only end like this: in a sea of ​​controversy. What did Novak Djokovic expect? That the announcement via Instagram of his departure for Melbourne – where he will be chasing his tenth Australian Open triumph from 17 January – would not trigger protests from around the world, after months of the mystery surrounding his vaccination against Covid has never been clarified. ? And what did they think down there in the Down Under? Could it all end in the infantry?

In short, one of the most rigid countries in the containment of the pandemic – and which, despite the closure of the borders and the traces on the carpet, is in full resurgence of the virus: 50,000 positives in the last 24 hours – gives the green light to the tennis number one thanks to an unspecified medical exemption, the details of which are not known for privacy reasons. The very fact that there is an exemption suggests that Djokovic does not have the “sine qua non” condition to enter Australia: the complete vaccination cycle, net of the negativity to the molecular test to be carried out before departure. The ok with exception to its entry into Australia therefore suggests the classic two weights and two measures. Then, being a champion of his caliber, to clear the field of any misunderstanding, to dispel the belief that a privileged corridor has been opened to him thanks to his status as king of the Australian Open, sunlight would have been better. Call a press conference and explain the details of this exemption. Transparency matters more than privacy. Especially in 2022, when there is very little left of private to defend, even more so from public figures, whose thickness of each hair we now know by “like”.