Novak Djokovic has reiterated his earlier comments that he bears no hard feelings on his return to Australia after his visa cancellation and subsequent deportation in January ahead of the Australian Open tennis tournament. Djokovic was deported almost 12 months ago after arriving unvaccinated against COVID-19 at a time when the country was still subject to strict quarantine regulations and proof of vaccination. Those regulations have since been lifted and in November, the Australian government overturned the three-year ban that came with Djokovic’s deportation and granted him a visa to return for the Australian Open beginning Jan. 16. Djokovic arrived back in Australia on Tuesday ahead of the Adelaide International, where he is scheduled to play next week. Read more: Djokovic expected to be granted visa to compete in Australian Open “It’s great to be back in Australia,” he said Thursday. “It’s a country where I’ve had tremendous success in my career, particularly in Melbourne. It’s by far my most successful Grand Slam. I’m hoping that everything is going to be positive. Obviously (fan reaction) is not something that I can predict. “I’ll do my best to play good tennis and bring good emotions and good feelings to the crowd.” Djokovic said he still has difficulty forgetting his deportation. “Obviously what happened 12 months ago was not easy for me, for my family, team, anybody who is close to me. It’s obviously disappointing to leave the country like that,” he said. Read more: Double-fault: Visa revoked again, Djokovic faces deportation “You can’t forget those events. It’s one of these things that stays with you for I guess the rest of your life. It’s something that I’ve never experienced before and hopefully never again. But it is a valuable life experience for me and something that as I said will stay there, but I have to move on.” Djokovic has won the Australian Open a record nine times, including the last three times he played. Rafael Nadal won the 2022 title in Djokovic’s absence.

Hours after Russia invaded Ukraine in February, health staff at a children’s hospital in the south started secretly planning how to save the babies. Russians were suspected of seizing orphan children and sending them to Russia, so staff at the children’s regional hospital in Kherson city began fabricating orphans’ medical records to make it appear like they were too ill to move. “We deliberately wrote false information that the children were sick and could not be transported,” said Dr. Olga Pilyarska, head of intensive care. “We were scared that (the Russians) would find out … (but) we decided that we would save the children at any cost.” Throughout the war Russians have been accused of deporting Ukrainian children to Russia or Russian-held territories to raise them as their own. At least 1,000 children were seized from schools and orphanages in the Kherson region during Russia’s eight-month occupation of the area, say local authorities. Their whereabouts are still unknown. But residents say even more children would have gone missing had it not been for the efforts of some in the community who risked their lives to hide as many children as they could. At the hospital in Kherson, staff invented diseases for 11 abandoned babies under their care, so they wouldn’t have to give them to the orphanage where they knew they’d be given Russian documents and potentially taken away. One baby had “pulmonary bleeding”, another “uncontrollable convulsions” and another needed “artificial ventilation,” said Pilyarska of the fake records. On the outskirts of Kherson in the village of Stepanivka, Volodymyr Sahaidak the director of a center for social and psychological rehabilitation, was also falsifying paperwork to hide 52 orphaned and vulnerable children. The 61-year-old placed some of the children with seven of his staff, others were taken to distant relatives and some of the older ones remained with him, he said. “It seemed that if I did not hide my children they would simply be taken away from me,” he said. Read: Russian oil cap begins, trying to pressure Putin on Ukraine But moving them around wasn’t easy. After Russia occupied Kherson and much of the region in March, they started separating orphans at checkpoints, forcing Sahaidak to get creative about how to transport them. In one instance he faked records saying that a group of kids had received treatment in the hospital and were being taken by their aunt to be reunited with their mother who was nine months pregnant and waiting for them on the other side of the river, he said. While Sahaidak managed to stave off the Russians, not all children were as lucky. In the orphanage in Kherson — where the hospital would have sent the 11 babies — some 50 children were evacuated in October and allegedly taken to Crimea, which Russia illegally annexed in 2014, a security guard at the institution and neighbors told The Associated Press. “A bus came with the inscription Z (a symbol painted on Russian vehicles) and they were taken away,” said Anastasiia Kovalenko, who lives nearby. At the start of the invasion, a local aid group tried to hide the children in a church but the Russians found them several months later, returned them to the orphanage and then evacuated them, said locals. Earlier this year, The Associated Press reported that Russia is trying to give thousands of Ukrainian children to Russian families for foster care or adoption. The AP found that officials have deported Ukrainian children to Russia or Russian-held territories without consent, lied to them that they weren’t wanted by their parents, used them for propaganda, and given them Russian families and citizenship. The Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think tank, says Russian officials are conducting a deliberate depopulation campaign in occupied parts of Ukraine and deporting children under the guise of medical rehabilitation schemes and adoption programs. Russian authorities have repeatedly said that moving children to Russia is intended to protect them from hostilities. The Russian Foreign Ministry has rejected the claims that the country is seizing and deporting the children. It has noted that the authorities are searching for relatives of parentless children left in Ukraine to find opportunities to send them home when possible. Russian children’s rights ombudswoman Maria Lvova-Belova personally oversaw moving hundreds of orphans from Russian-controlled regions of Ukraine for adoption by Russian families. She has claimed that some of the children were offered an opportunity to return to Ukraine but refused to do so. Her statement couldn’t be independently verified. Read: Can Ukraine pay for war without wrecking economy? UNICEF’s Europe and Central Asia child protection regional adviser, Aaron Greenberg, said that until the fate of a child’s parents or other close relatives can be verified, each separated child is considered to have living close relatives, and an assessment must be led by authorities in the countries where the children are located. Local and national security and law enforcement are looking for the children who were moved but they still don’t know what happened to them, said Galina Lugova, head of Kherson’s military administration. “We do not know the fate of these children … we do not know where the children from orphanages or from our educational institutions are, and this is a problem,” she said. For now, much of the burden is falling on locals to find and bring them home. In July, the Russians brought 15 children from the front lines in the nearby region of Mykolaiv to Sahaidak’s rehabilitation center and then on to Russia, he said. With the help of foreigners and volunteers, he managed to track them down and get them to Georgia, he said. Sahaidak would not provide further details about the operation for fear of jeopardizing it, but said the children are expected to return to Ukraine in the coming weeks. For some, the threat of Russia deporting children has brought unexpected results. In October when there were signs that the Russians were retreating, Tetiana Pavelko, a nurse at the children’s hospital, worried they’d take the babies with them. Unable to bear children of her own, the 43-year-old rushed to the ward and adopted a 10-month-old girl. Wiping tears of joy from her cheeks, Pavelko said she named the baby Kira after a Christian martyr. “She helped people, healed and performed many miracles,” she said.

The Biden administration, reacting to a federal court ruling in Texas, has suspended an order that had focused resources for the arrest and deportation of immigrants on those who are considered a threat to public safety and national security. The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement Saturday it will abide by the decision issued this month, even though it “strongly disagrees” and is appealing it. Immigrant advocates and experts on Monday said the suspension of Biden’s order will only sow fear among immigrant communities. Many living in the country illegally will now be afraid to leave their homes out of concern they’ll be detained, even if they’re otherwise law-abiding, said Steve Yale-Loehr, an immigration law professor at Cornell University. Also read: Biden urges Western unity on Ukraine amid war fatigue Prioritizing whom to arrest and deport is a necessity, he said. “We simply don’t have enough ICE agents to pick up and put into proceedings everyone who violates our immigration law,” Yale-Loehr said. The Texas case centers around a memorandum Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, issued last September, directing immigration agencies to focus their enforcement efforts on those who represented a threat to national security or public safety or who recently entered the U.S. illegally. The approach was a departure from President Donald Trump’s administration, when immigration agencies were given wide latitude on whom to arrest, detain and deport, prompting many immigrants without legal status to upend their daily routines to evade detection, such as avoiding driving or even taking sanctuary in churches and other places generally off limits to immigration authorities. But on June 10, U.S. District Judge Drew Tipton in southern Texas voided Mayorkas' memo, siding with Republican state officials in Texas and Louisiana who argued the Biden administration did not have the authority to issue such a directive. In response, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers will make enforcement decisions on “a case-by-case basis in a professional and responsible manner, informed by their experience as law enforcement officials and in a way that best protects against the greatest threats to the homeland,” the Department of Homeland Security said in its statement Saturday. Also read: G-7 to ban Russian gold in response to Ukraine war: Biden How the court ruling plays out in cities and towns across the country remains to be seen, advocates say. Sarang Sekhavat, political director at the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition, the largest such group in New England, said the outcome likely rests on the approach taken by local ICE field offices. Some ICE offices may elect to go after a wider range of immigrants, while others will continue to focus on going after ones that pose the greatest threats, he said. “This takes away any kind of centralized guidance,” Sekhavat said. “What this does is really leave it in the hands of the local field office and how they want to go about enforcement.” Nationwide, ICE officials arrested more than 74,000 immigrants and removed more than 59,000 in the fiscal year that ended in September, according to the agency’s most recent annual report. That’s down from the nearly 104,000 arrests and 186,000 deportations the prior fiscal year, according to ICE data. ICE spokespersons in Washington and the Boston field office, which covers the six-state New England region, declined to comment Monday, as did officials in ICE’s Los Angeles field office. But in a June interview with The Associated Press conducted before the Texas court ruling, Thomas Giles, head of ICE's LA office, said nine out of 10 immigration arrests locally involve people convicted of crimes. He said the Biden administration’s priorities didn’t bring a huge change for the region because officers were already focused on people with felony criminal convictions or prior deportations. It required them to weigh aggravating and mitigating factors and make more detailed evaluations on cases, he said, but the focus remained constant. “We’re out here enhancing public safety," Giles said.

Bangladesh has reiterated its long-standing request for the deportation of Nur Chowdhury, the self-confessed and convicted killer of Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. “This killer has been living in Canada as a fugitive for close to thirty years. Canada, being known as the proponent for promotion and protection of human rights, and the rule of law, the two countries can work together to agree on some modalities for the deportation of this heinous killer and flagrant violator of human rights,” said Foreign Minister Dr AK Abdul Momen. The Foreign Minister made the request in a message marking the 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Bangladesh and Canada. Bangladesh and Canada established diplomatic relations on February 14, 1972. He expressed the hope and optimism that the existing excellent relations and partnership between Bangladesh and Canada will continue to flourish. “The two countries would work closely to take them to new heights in the spirit of mutual interest, friendship, and respect.” Dr Momen said Bangladesh looks forward to closer cooperation and partnership with Canada in defence and security issues, including elimination of any kind of extremism. Also raed: Joint committee to work to brand Bangladesh in Canada “Bangladesh is also committed to deepening and expanding the trade and investment relations with Canada and would work closely for the steady growth in this sector,” he mentioned. “As we celebrate 50 years, Canada looks forward to building on our solid foundation of friendship and cooperation to strengthen and diversify our partnership,” said the Canadian High Commission in Dhaka in a separate message. The Foreign Minister said they deeply appreciate Canada's support to the issues of the Forcibly Displaced Myanmar Nationals (FDMNs). “Bangladesh expects Canada playing a more active role in ensuring that the perpetrators of genocide and crime against humanity in Rakhine State of Myanmar are brought to justice and a conducive environment in Rakhine State in Myanmar is created for a safe and dignified return of more than 1.1 million FDMNs (Rohingyas) from Bangladesh as soon as possible,” he said. Dr Momen recalled the support of the Canadian people and the then Canadian government led by the former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, extended to the glorious War of Independence. Canada was also one of the first few countries to recognise Bangladesh immediately after its independence. Alo read: Bangladesh, Canada plan to launch JWG to boost trade, investment “I would like to recall that the Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and the former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau laid down the foundation of friendship between the two countries based on shared commitment to peace, pluralism, and dignity of people,” said the Foreign Minister. The first official visit of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman to Ottawa, Canada in 1973 ushered a new horizon of friendship and bonding for the people of the two countries, he said. Since then, Dr Momen said, the partnership has been steadily growing. “I also like to recognize Canada's valuable support to Bangladesh's membership in the Commonwealth and the United Nations after the Independence.” Dr Momen thanked Canada for its assistance in the reconstruction of the war-ravaged Bangladesh following the recognition and valuable support in the field of socio-economic development for the development of youth and women's economic empowerment. He said Bangladesh has graduated now as a middle-income country and the country is known as a "Development Miracle". “In our journey through this tremendous socio-economic development under Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, Canadian support has also played a useful part. Today, Canada is Bangladesh's important development partner and a trusted and tested friend,” Dr Momen mentioned. He said Bangladesh is working closely with Canada on several important global issues, including climate change, promoting global peace and security and many others. “We thank Canada for its appreciation for Bangladesh's contribution to the UN Peacekeeping operation,” he said.

Novak Djokovic’s hopes of playing at the Australian Open were dashed Sunday after a court dismissed the top-ranked tennis star’s appeal against a deportation order. Three Federal Court judges unanimously upheld a decision made on Friday by Immigration Minister Alex Hawke to cancel the 34-year-old Serb’s visa on public interest grounds. The decision likely means that Djokovic, who is not vaccinated against COVID-19, will remain in detention in Melbourne until he is deported. READ: Djokovic back in detention, continues to fight deportation Deportation usually occurs as soon as possible after an order unless prevented by court action. The government has not said when Djokovic will leave. A deportation order also usually includes a three-year ban on returning to Australia. Chief Justice James Allsop said the ruling came down to whether the minister's decision was "irrational or legally unreasonable.” “It is no part of the function of the court to decide upon the merits or wisdom of the decision,” Allsop said. The panel of judges did not provide written explanations for their decision on Sunday. Those would be released in the coming days, Allsop said. “This is not an appeal against the decision of the executive government,” Allsop said. “It is an application to the court as a separate arm of the government ... to review ... the lawfulness or the legality of the (minister's) decision.” Djokovic was also ordered to pay the government's court costs. READ: Double-fault: Visa revoked again, Djokovic faces deportation The court process that Djokovic had hoped would to keep his aspirations alive for a 21st Grand Slam title was extraordinarily fast by Australian standards. Within three hours of Hawke's announcement on Friday afternoon that Djokovic's visa was cancelled, his lawyers were before a Federal Circuit and Family Court judge to initiate their challenge to the decision. The case was elevated to the Federal Court on Saturday and submissions were filed by both sides that same day. The three judges heard the case over five hours on Sunday and announced their verdict two hours later. Between the end of the hearing and the verdict, Tennis Australia, the tournament's organizer, had announced that Djokovic was scheduled to play the last match on Monday at the Rod Laver Arena. He was due to play Miomir Kecmanovic, a fellow Serb ranked 78th in the world. Tennis Australia had no immediate comment on the star player's legal defeat. The minister cancelled the visa on the grounds that Djokovic’s presence in Australia may be a risk to the health and “good order” of the Australian public and “may be counterproductive to efforts at vaccination by others in Australia.” Djokovic’s visa was initially cancelled on Jan. 6 at Melbourne’s airport hours after he arrived to compete in the first Grand Slam of 2022. A border official cancelled his visa after deciding Djokovic didn’t qualify for a medical exemption from Australia’s rules for unvaccinated visitors.

Novak Djokovic was reported to be back in immigration detention Saturday after his legal challenge to avoid being deported from Australia for being unvaccinated for COVID-19 was moved to three judges of a higher court. A Federal Court hearing has been scheduled for Sunday, a day before the men’s No. 1-ranked tennis player and nine-time Australian Open champion was due to begin his title defense at the first Grand Slam tennis tournament of the year. Police closed down a lane behind the building where Djokovic’s lawyers are based and two vehicles exited the building mid-afternoon local time on Saturday. In television footage, Djokovic could be seen wearing a face mask in the back of a vehicle near an immigration detention hotel. Also read: Double-fault: Visa revoked again, Djokovic faces deportation The Australian Associated Press reported that Djokovic was back in detention. He spent four nights confined to a hotel near downtown Melbourne before being released last Monday when he won a court challenge on procedural grounds against his first visa cancellation. Immigration Minister Alex Hawke on Friday blocked the 34-year-old Serb’s visa, which was originally revoked when he landed at a Melbourne airport on Jan. 5. Deportation from Australia can lead to a three-year ban on returning to the country, although that may be waived, depending on the circumstances. Djokovic has acknowledged that his travel declaration was incorrect because it failed to indicate that he had been in multiple countries over the two weeks before his arrival in Australia. But the incorrect travel information is not why Hawke decided that deporting Djokovic was in the public interest. His lawyers filed documents in court on Saturday that revealed Hawke had stated that “Djokovic is perceived by some as a talisman of a community of anti-vaccination sentiment.” Australia is one of the most highly vaccinated populations in the world, with 89% of people aged 16 and older fully inoculated for COVID-19. But the minister said that Djokovic’s presence in Australia may be a risk to the health and “good order” of the Australian public. His presence “may be counterproductive to efforts at vaccination by others in Australia,” the minister said. The Health Department advised that Djokovic was a “low” risk of transmitting COVID-19 and a “very low” risk of transmitting the disease at the Australian Open. The minister cited comments Djokovic made in April 2020, before a COVID-19 vaccine was available, that he was “opposed to vaccination.” Djokovic had “previously stated he wouldn’t want to be forced by someone to take a vaccine” to compete in tournaments. The evidence “makes it clear that he has publicly expressed anti-vaccination sentiment,” the minister wrote in his reasons for canceling Djokovic’s visa. Djokovic’s lawyers argue that the minister had cited no evidence that Djokovic’s presence in Australia may “foster anti-vaccination sentiment.” Djokovic will be allowed out of hotel detention on Sunday to visit his lawyers’ offices for the video court hearing. On Saturday, Federal Chief Justice James Allsop announced that he would hear the case with Justices David O’Callaghan and Anthony Besanko. The decision for three judges to hear the appeal instead of a single judge elevates the importance of the case from the judiciary's perspective and potentially gives Djokovic an advantage. The trio are regarded as experienced judges who are more likely to find a government minister at fault than their more junior colleagues. O’Callaghan had earlier suggested a full bench hear the case. A full bench is three or five judges. A full bench means any verdict would be less likely to be appealed. The only avenue of appeal would be the High Court and there would be no guarantee that that court would even agree to hear such an appeal. Djokovic’s lawyer Paul Holdenson opted for a full bench while Hawke’s lawyer Stephen Lloyd preferred a single judge. “There's nothing special about the grounds,” Lloyd argued, referring to Djokovic's argument that Hawke had made an irrational decision based on no evidence. “They're not novel legally and we say there's no justification for stepping out of the ordinary” by appointing three judges, Lloyd added. Legal observers suspect Lloyd wanted to keep the option open of another Federal Court appeal because he thinks the minister can mount a stronger case without the rush to reach a verdict before Monday. Also read: Djokovic in Australian Open draw despite visa uncertainty Djokovic has won the past three Australian Opens, part of his overall Grand Slam haul of 20 championships. He is tied with Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer for the most by a man in history. In a post on social media Wednesday that constituted his most extensive public comments yet on the episode, Djokovic blamed his agent for checking the wrong box on the form, calling it “a human error and certainly not deliberate.” In that same post, Djokovic said he went ahead with an interview and a photo shoot with a French newspaper in Serbia despite knowing he had tested positive for COVID-19 two days earlier. Djokovic has been attempting to use what he says was a positive test taken on Dec. 16 to justify a medical exemption that would allow him to skirt the vaccine requirement on the grounds that he already had COVID-19. In canceling Djokovic’ visa, Hawke said that Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s government “is firmly committed to protecting Australia’s borders, particularly in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic.” Morrison himself welcomed Djokovic’s pending deportation. The episode has touched a nerve in Australia, and particularly in Victoria state, where locals went through hundreds of days of lockdowns during the worst of the pandemic. Australia faces a massive surge in virus cases driven by the highly transmissible omicron variant. On Friday, the nation reported 130,000 new cases, including nearly 35,000 in Victoria state. Although many infected people aren’t getting as sick as they did in previous outbreaks, the surge is still putting severe strain on the health system, with more than 4,400 people hospitalized. It has also disrupted workplaces and supply chains. Djokovic’s supporters in Serbia have been dismayed by the visa cancellations. Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic on Friday accused the Australian government of “harassing” and “maltreating” Djokovic and asked whether it is just trying to score political points ahead of upcoming elections. “Why didn’t you return him back right away, or tell him it was impossible to get a visa?” Vucic asked the Australian authorities in a social media address. “Why are you harassing him and why are you maltreating not only him, but his family and an entire nation that is free and proud." Everyone at the Australian Open — including players, their support teams and spectators — is required to be vaccinated. According to Grand Slam rules, if Djokovic is forced to pull out of the tournament before the order of play for Day 1 is announced, No. 5 seed Andrey Rublev would move into Djokovic’s spot in the bracket. If Djokovic withdraws from the tournament after Monday’s schedule is released, he would be replaced in the field by what’s known as a “lucky loser” — a player who loses in the qualifying tournament but gets into the main draw because of another player’s exit before competition has started. And if Djokovic plays in a match — or more — and then is told he can no longer participate in the tournament, his next opponent would simply advance to the following round and there would be no replacement.

Another 224 Bangladeshi workers were deported by Saudi Arabia on Saturday, although many of them claimed to have legal documents.

Some 109 more Bangladeshi workers have been sent back to the country from Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia has deported another 132 Bangladeshi workers, including five women, on Tuesday night.