political editor chris mason and i think he has details of the new look 1922 committee, the first stage in the process. to choose new members and then beyond that choose the process. not to go down the whole list, aaron bell, richard gideon, to think it will be a quick decision in terms of the process? or will they have to thrash out a lot of disagreements? i have to thrash out a lot of disagreements? have to thrash out a lot of disagreements? have to thrash out a lot of disaereements? , , ., ~ :, disagreements? i can t speak for them, they disagreements? i can t speak for them, they will disagreements? i can t speak for them, they will be disagreements? i can t speak for them, they will be aware - disagreements? i can t speak for them, they will be aware of - disagreements? i can t speak for them, they will be aware of what disagreements? i can t speak for i them, they will be aware of what is on our shoulders here and we have a job to do for the country and i suggest we get
so scott morrison saw a chance to make some political capital out of this and i don t think that s a particularly controversial point of view here in serbia. guy de launey in belgrade. let s talk to the immigration lawyer, daniel estrin, in perth. thank you for your time today. just take us through your analysis of the ruling from thejudge. take us through your analysis of the ruling from the judge. the take us through your analysis of the ruling from thejudge. the ruling in favour of novak djokovic, largely on a point of procedure, i understand? indeed. so it s important to know that the ruling was made essentially after doubling down and aggressively fighting the decision, they conceded in the end the decision was unreasonable. that mr djokovic did not get enough time to answer the case and therefore the decision should be quashed. what is remarkable and quite extraordinary in the case is the final comments by the minister s lawyers, no doubt
fully sure where he is. they understand he may be at his lawyer s office but again this cannot be confirmed. what we do know is this. we do knowjudge anthony kelly has made a decision that novak djokovic should be released from detention, should be released from detention, should be released from detention, should be allowed entry into australia and should be allowed to compete in the australian open. he has made the decision to overturn the government decision to revoke his disciples that this has been the judgment today and why there has been a gp atmosphere with his supporters. then things got confusing and uncertain. while this was happening, we also know the lawyer for the government has said the government, the federal government, specifically the immigration minister, could still exercise his executive powers and cancel the visa and attempt to deport novak djokovic. on what basis? forwhat deport novak djokovic. on what
this is bbc news. these are the latest headlines in the uk and around the world. novak djokovic wins his appeal against a decision to refuse him a visa to enter australia and is ordered to be released from immigration detention. after the ruling, the tennis star s supporters in melbourne celebrate the news. what s your reaction to the ruling? you can get in touch about this or any of the other stories we ve covering today. on twitter, it s @annitabbc or use the hashtag bbcyourquestions. 19 people including nine children have died in a fire that engulfed a high rise block of flats in new york. it s thought a malfunctioning electric heater caused the blaze. a court in myanmar sentences the detained leader, aung san suu kyi, to anotherfour
waiting to see how this unfolds. if you were a pr person advising novak djokovic now would you be saying to him this is an opportunity for you to get out there, say to the public what happened, explain your point of view and try to take into account the feelings of people who were angry that somehow it seemed a separate rule had been applied to him? to separate rule had been applied to him? ., , ., , ., separate rule had been applied to him? ., , 4 ., separate rule had been applied to him? ., , ~ ., ., him? to be honest, i don t know what i would do. him? to be honest, i don t know what i would do. being him? to be honest, i don t know what i would do, being in him? to be honest, i don t know what i would do, being in the him? to be honest, i don t know what i would do, being in the skin - him? to be honest, i don t know what i would do, being in the skin of - him? to be honest, i don t know what i would do, being in the skin of his - i would do, being in the skin of his pr