LAHORE: The Lahore High Court has ruled that the right to movement is an inseparable part of right to life and the exercise of executive authority is subject to judicial review.

“The very essence and existence of life is felt, acknowledged, recognised and endured with the act of movement. The act of movement starts in the womb of mother and ends with pronouncement of death,” says a ruling issued by Justice Abid Hussain Chattha.

The ruling came on a petition by the wife and children of a chief executive officer of a securities company challenging a directive of the interior ministry that placed them on the Exit Control List (ECL). The company faced a reference of the NAB on charges of embezzlement.

The judge remarks that it is movement that distinguishes life from death and as such, the right to movement is cherished, protected and guarded from times immemorial. He notes that the world history is replete with examples that sons of the soil have defended the right to liberty and movement by sacrificing their blood and lives.

“Unreasonable restrictions have led to revolutions and rebellions and given rise to movements for freedom and independence,” the judge observes.

The liberal grant of the right promotes peace and progress of a state while its curtailment germinates suffocation and suppression of human abilities.

“Its anti-thesis is confinement. The importance of this right can be gauged from the fact that confinement is equally recognised as a legitimate punishment in all jurisdictions,” the judge remarks in his ruling.

He further observes that the curbs and restrictions on movement have serious psychological and physical repercussions and effects. He says the right to movement has always been regulated by the state and is used as a double-edged weapon. However, in the modern world, there is consensus that rights ought to be liberally construed and granted subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by law.

And this right is not limited to movement within Pakistan but extends and includes the right to leave and enter Pakistan, the judge observes and adds that the state must come forward with legitimate and lawful, cogent, reasonable, justifiable and substantive reasons to clog the right to movement of a citizen.

The petitioners challenged the MoI’s decision saying they were neither the shareholders nor directors of the company.

Justice Chattha allowed the petition with an observation that the government failed to advance any cogent or substantive reason, whereby, the names of the petitioners were placed on the ECL.

The judge notes that it is on record that none of the petitioners has been nominated by the reference and no role whatsoever has been attributed to them. He further observes that none of the petitioners is accused in any criminal case.

“It is trite law that even registration of a case or pendency of a criminal case is not sufficient to include or place one’s name on the Exit Control List,” the judge adds.

The judge remarks that the mere relationship of the petitioners with the CEO of the company is not a valid legal basis. “Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the impugned memorandum and the order are set aside and declared as unconstitutional, illegal and unlawful,” the ruling concludes.

Published in Dawn, July 31st, 2021