Islamabad:
The Superior Court of Islamabad (IHC) has suspended the decision of a cabinet subcommittee to place the names of the family members of a petitioner, Usman Khan, on the output control list (ECL).
The court has indicated that Prima Facie there was no underlying base for the placement of names of the individual in the ECL and that no material has been placed before the court to establish how Khan was involved or linked to terrorist activities.
An IHC bank comprised of Judge Babar Sattar issued a written order on a request presented against the placement of Khan’s names and their other eight family members in the exclusive list.
The Order said that an intelligence agency had initially recommended that the names of nine individuals, who are part of the USMAN Khan’s family, are placed in the ECL. He said that these names included the names of children of up to thirteen, as well as the petitioner’s mother.
“A satisfactory response was not provided on what scrutiny had made the Ministry of Interior before a working document met and it was recommended that the names were considered by a cabinet subcommittee for its location in the ECL.”
The order declared that the interior of the secretary told the bank that the Intelligence Agency has now recommended that seven of the nine names of the ECL be withdrawn, but that two names must remain in the list, since it is suspected that they are involved in terrorist activities.
“The name that is recommended to maintain in the ECL includes the name of Mr. Faizan Usman, the eighteen -year -old, who was previously kidnapped strongly in which case he is pending before this court.”
The court indicated that he was not satisfied with the explanations provided.
“It seems that the Ministry of Interior had no mental application [while] Preparation of a working document that supports the placement of the names of the petitioners in the ECL.
“The recommendations received by an intelligence agency were sent to the Cabinet Subcommittee by the Ministry of Interior as Post Office,” he said.
The Order declared that the other possibility was “much more condemnatory”, since it implied that the petitioner and his family were subject to reprisals for presenting the case of his forced disappearance before the court.
“In this case, the Ministry of Interior facilitating the placement of their names in the ECL would be acting as an accomplice and as an instrument that obstructs justice in a pending issue before this court.
