The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has suspended a cabinet sub-committee’s decision to place names of the family members of a petitioner, Usman Khan, on the Exit Control List (ECL).
The court has noted that prima facie there was no underlying basis for placement of names of the individual on the ECL and that no material has been placed before the court to establish how Khan was involved in or linked to terrorist activities.
An IHC bench comprising Justice Babar Sattar issued a written order on a petition filed against placement of the names of Khan and his eight other family members on the no-fly list.
The order noted that an intelligence agency had initially recommended that the names of nine individualsthat are a part of Usman Khan’s familybe placed on the ECL. It said these names included the names of minors as young as thirteen years old as well as the mother of the petitioner.
“No satisfactory response was provided as to what scrutiny had been undertaken by the Ministry of Interior before a working paper was put together and the names were recommended to be considered by a Sub-Committee of the Cabinet for placement on the ECL.”
The order stated that the secretary interior told the bench that the intelligence agency has now recommended that seven of the nine names be taken off from the ECL but two names should stay on the list as they are suspected of being involved in terrorist activities.
“The name that is recommended to be kept on the ECL includes the name of Mr Faizan Usman, the eighteen-year-old, who was previously abducted forcefully in whose case is pending before this court.”
The court noted that it was not satisfied with the explanations provided.
“It appears that either there was no application of mind by the Ministry of Interior [while] preparing a working paper supporting placement of the names of the petitioners on the ECL.
“The recommendations received by an intelligence agency were just forwarded to the Cabinet Sub-Committee by the Ministry of Interior as a post office,” it said.
The order stated that the other possibility was “much more damning”, as it implied that the petitioner and his family were subjected to reprisal for bringing the case of his enforced disappearance to the court.
“In such a case, the Ministry of Interior by facilitating the placement of their names on the ECL would be acting as an accomplice and as an instrument obstructing justice in a matter pending before this court.
