SC unhappy over delays in case about Pakistanis stranded in Bangladesh

Published February 19, 2015
An Urdu speaker stranded Pakistani woman cries in Dhaka, Bangladesh as police arrest her brother.—Reuters/File
An Urdu speaker stranded Pakistani woman cries in Dhaka, Bangladesh as police arrest her brother.—Reuters/File

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court took exception on Wednesday to failure of the Foreign Office and the cabinet division to answer contentions raised in a 2009 petition seeking repatriation of around 237,000 Pakistanis stranded in Bangladesh.

A three-judge bench headed by Justice Amir Hani Muslim took up the petition moved by Advocate Rashidul Haq Qazi, representing the Stranded Pakistanis General Repatriation Committee and the Organisation for Repatriation of Stranded Pakistanis in Bangladesh.

Also read: SC takes up petition on repatriation

The court ordered the ministries concerned to submit their comments on the petition within a week and warned that otherwise their secretaries would be called to explain the delay during the next hearing.

Deputy Attorney General Sohail Mahmood told the court that despite having been contacted several times both the FO and the cabinet division had failed to provide a reply, while the interior ministry had stated that the foreign ministry would be in a better position to respond to the contentions.

The interior ministry explained that under Section 16-A of the Pakistan Citizenship Act, 1951 all persons residing in those territories which before Dec 16, 1971 constituted the province of East Pakistan and were residing there since that day voluntarily or otherwise should cease to be citizens of Pakistan.

It said those who had not been repatriated before March 18, 1978, when the section was introduced, but whose repatriation had been agreed to by the government continued to be citizens of Pakistan under Clause iv of its Sub Section 1.

Cabinet Division Director Muhammad Aftab informed the court that a Bangladesh high court had declared stranded Pakistanis as citizens of Bangladesh in 2003 and that country’s supreme court had also ratified it.

The bench asked him to file written reply in this regard and adjourned the hearing for an indefinite period.

Published in Dawn February 19th , 2015

On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play

Opinion

Editorial

Judiciary’s SOS
28 Mar, 2024

Judiciary’s SOS

SOME clearly thought that senior judges would prove just as easily ‘manageable’ as our seasoned politicians...
Data protection
28 Mar, 2024

Data protection

WHAT do we want? Data protection laws. When do we want them? Immediately. Without delay, if we are to prevent ...
Selling humans
28 Mar, 2024

Selling humans

HUMAN traders feed off economic distress; they peddle promises of a better life to the impoverished who, mired in...
New terror wave
Updated 27 Mar, 2024

New terror wave

The time has come for decisive government action against militancy.
Development costs
27 Mar, 2024

Development costs

A HEFTY escalation of 30pc in the cost of ongoing federal development schemes is one of the many decisions where the...
Aitchison controversy
Updated 27 Mar, 2024

Aitchison controversy

It is hoped that higher authorities realise that politics and nepotism have no place in schools.