FCC suspends LHC ruling on government power to inactivate passports

ISLAMABAD: The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) on Monday suspended a Lahore High Court ruling that had struck down provisions of the Passport Rules 2021 allowing the government to render passports inactive and impose long-term travel restrictions on deportees and suspected human traffickers.

With the suspension of the Dec 23, 2025 LHC order, the federal government’s authority to inactivate passports and place long-duration travel bans has been restored for now, pending a final decision by the FCC.

A three-member bench headed by Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi heard an appeal filed by the Directorate General of Immigration and Passports (DGIP). The court issued notices to the respondents, including Farhan Ali, the additional director general of immigration at the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), the FIA Multan Circle deputy director, and the director of the FIA regional office in Multan.

Case arose after deportation from Iran

The case stems from the deportation of Farhan Ali, a resident of Vehari, from Iran. After his return, the FIA recommended that his name be placed on the Passport Control List (PCL). The DGIP then inactivated his passport and imposed a five-year travel restriction.

Ali challenged the move before the LHC’s Multan bench, which ruled in his favour on Dec 23, 2025. The high court held that the power to inactivate a passport under Rule 23 of the Passport Rules 2021 went beyond Section 8 of the Passport Act, 1974 and was therefore ultra vires.

The LHC also held that imposing a travel ban or restriction of five years or more under Rule 22(2)(c) was substantially ultra vires of the parent law. It further observed that the authority to cancel, impound or confiscate a passport did not automatically include the power to inactivate it.

Government’s arguments before the FCC

In its appeal, the DGIP argued that the LHC had declared Rule 22(2)(c) ultra vires even though Ali had not specifically challenged that provision in his original petition.

The FIA also told the court that Ali had been deported from Iran and that the record showed he had left Pakistan illegally and violated the immigration laws of a foreign country, in addition to international immigration law.

“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 petition stated.

The petition said the state was responsible for discouraging people from travelling abroad illegally and harming the country’s image. It also argued that, under government policy, a person who had brought disrepute to the country could not be allowed to benefit on the pretext of seeking employment abroad.

During the hearing, Justice Rizvi asked whether the matter concerned people who had gone abroad illegally, or those travelling through dunki, a term often used broadly for informal migration routes.

Additional Attorney General Chaudhry Aamir Rehman, appearing for the government, said Ali’s name had been placed on the PCL because he was deported from Iran.

Legal basis cited in appeal

The petition argued that under Section 11 of the Passport Act, 1974, the federal government could delegate functions to the director general of immigration, who framed the Passport Rules 2021. On that basis, it maintained that Rule 23 was legally valid.

Citing Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, the petition further argued that the authority to cancel, impound or confiscate also included the power to inactivate, just as the power to create includes the power to modify or revoke.

The appeal also referred to a 2017-18 human rights case in which the Supreme Court had directed the formulation of standard operating procedures to blacklist human traffickers and deportees, including cancellation of passports and placement on a blacklist for a specified period.

According to the petition, restricting the travel of deportees was in line with Pakistan’s international commitments, while the right to travel abroad under Article 15 of the Constitution was not absolute.

The DGIP has asked the FCC to set aside the LHC judgment, dismiss Ali’s original petition, and declare that placing a person’s name on the PCL for five years under Rule 22(2)(c) is neither arbitrary nor ultra vires.