ISLAMABAD: The government’s authority to inactivate passports and slap long-term travel bans stands restored after four months on Monday when the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) suspended the Lahore High Court’s (LHC) decision declaring certain provisions of the Passport Rules 2021 as ultra vires.

However, the restoration of the federal government’s authority is temporary as the FCC has not revoked but suspended the Dec 23, 2025, order till a final judgement on an appeal moved by the Directorate General of Immig­ra­tion and Passports (DGIP) against the LHC decision.

Headed by Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, a three-judge FCC bench had earlier issued notices to the additional director general of immigration at the Federal Inv­es­tigation Agency (FIA), FIA Mul­tan circle deputy director, FIA Multan regional office director and a citizen named Farhan Ali.

The dispute arose when Ali, who hails from Vehari, was deported from Iran. Following his deportation, the FIA recommended that his name be placed in the Passport Control List (PCL). Consequently, the DGIP inactivated his passport and imposed a travel restriction of five years.

LHC order suspended but not revoked as final judgement still awaited

He then challenged the inactivation of his passport before the LHC Multan bench, which ruled in his favour with an observation that the power to inactivate a passport under Rule 23 of the Passport Rules 2021 was beyond the scope of Section 8 of the Passport Act, 1974 and, therefore, ultra vires.

Moreover, the LHC ruled that the imposition of a travel ban or restriction for five years or more under Rule 22(2)(c) was substantially ultra vires of the parent Act, adding that the power to cancel, impound, or confiscate a passport did not inherently include the power to inactivate it.

The DGIP, in its appeal before the FCC, argued that the LHC declared Rule 22(2)(c) as ultra vires when Ali had never challenged this specific rule in his original writ petition.

The FIA emphasised that the respondent was deported from Iran and the relevant record showed he exited the country illegally and violated the immigration laws of a foreign country, in addition to the international law of immigration.

During Monday’s hearing, Justice Rizvi wondered whether the matter was related to those who went abroad illegally or travel by using “dunki” — often used as a blanket term for all informal migrations.

Additional Attorney General (AAG) Chaudhry Aamir Rehman, contended that Ali’s name was placed on the PCL because he was deported from Iran.

In its appeal, the DGIP contended that the federal government had the power under Section 11 of the Passport Act, 1974, to delegate functions to the director general of immigration, who framed the Passport Rules 2021. “Therefore, Rule 23 is legally valid,” it said.

Published in Dawn, April 28th, 2026