ISLAMABAD:
The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) on Monday put on hold a landmark ruling of the Lahore High Court (LHC) that had struck down key provisions of the Passport Rules 2021, effectively restoring the federal government’s powers to inactivate passports and impose long-term travel bans on deportees and suspected human traffickers.
The interim relief means the state can continue placing individuals on the Passport Control List (PCL) and restricting their travel until the top court delivers a final judgment on the matter.
A three-judge bench headed by Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, hearing an appeal by the Directorate General of Immigration and Passports, issued notices to respondents, including citizen Farhan Ali and officials of the Federal Investigation Agency.
The case stems from the deportation of Farhan Ali, a resident of Vehari, from Iran. Following his return, the FIA recommended placing his name on the PCL, after which the DGIP inactivated his passport and imposed a five-year travel ban.
Ali challenged the move before the LHC’s Multan bench, which, on December 23, 2025, ruled in his favour, declaring that Rule 23 of the Passport Rules, allowing passport inactivation, went beyond the scope of Section 8 of the Passport Act, 1974, and was therefore ultra vires.
The LHC had also held that imposing a five-year or longer travel restriction under Rule 22(2)was substantially ultra vires of the parent law, observing that powers to cancel, impound or confiscate a passport did not inherently include the authority to “inactivate” it.
In its appeal, however, the DGIP argued that the high court had struck down Rule 22(2)© even though Ali had not challenged that specific provision in his original petition.
The FIA further maintained that Ali had been deported from Iran after illegally exiting Pakistan and violating foreign immigration laws, as well as international norms.
“Pakistan, as a responsible state, has endorsed the United Nations Convention on Transnational Organised Crime, 2000 and signed the protocol for the UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, which is the world’s primary legal instrument to combat human trafficking,” the DGIP’s petition highlighted.
The petition argued that discouraging illegal migration was a state responsibility, adding that individuals who brought disrepute to the country could not be allowed to benefit from overseas employment opportunities. During the hearing, Justice Rizvi questioned whether the case concerned illegal migration broadly or travel through informal migration routes or “dunki”.
Representing the government, Additional Attorney General Chaudhry Aamir Rehman said Ali’s inclusion in the PCL was a direct consequence of his deportation from Iran.
The petition further contended that under Section 11 of the Passport Act, 1974, the federal government could delegate its powers to the DGIP, which had lawfully framed the Passport Rules 2021.
Citing Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, it argued that the authority to cancel, impound or confiscate a passport inherently included the power to “inactivate” it, just as the power to create includes the power to modify or revoke.
The DGIP also referred to Supreme Court directions in a 201718 human rights case that called for standard operating procedures to blacklist human traffickers and deportees, including passport cancellation and time-bound restrictions.
It maintained that curbing the travel of deportees aligned with international commitments and stressed that the right to travel abroad under Article 15 of the Constitution was not absolute.
The petition urged the FCC to set aside the LHC ruling and uphold the validity of placing individuals on the PCL for five years under Rule 22(2)©, arguing that the measure was neither arbitrary nor ultra vires.
