Government questioned over failure to remove Zartaj Gul’s name from travel ban list

Islamabad High Court seeks a government explanation for not removing Zartaj Gul’s name from the travel ban list

The Islamabad High Court has sought a response from the government over its failure to remove Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Zartaj Gul’s name from the travel ban list, despite a previous court order.

During a contempt of court hearing, it was revealed that Zartaj Gul’s name remained on the no-fly list even though her bail in a related case was confirmed on 5th September. A government lawyer informed the court that an FIR against Zartaj Gul had been registered in Dera Ghazi Khan, but her lawyer argued that bail had already been granted in the case.

Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri noted that Zartaj’s bail was confirmed earlier in September and questioned why her travel restrictions were not lifted. The government lawyer stated he would seek instructions on the matter.

Zartaj Gul expressed her frustration, saying, "How can I travel when they refuse to give me my passport? I am an elected member of parliament, and it’s my right to travel freely." She also revealed that multiple secret FIRs had been lodged against her, resulting in her name being added to the travel ban list.

Previously, IHC granted PTI-backed SIC lawmaker's bail in cases 567 and 340; ordered AAG to remove her name from ECL.

"You do not put terrorists' names on the list, yet members of the assembly are brought to court. Should I summon the IG and ask?" Justice Jahangiri remarked.

"A political leader holds a rally, and you add their name to the ECL. No gang or terrorist cases have come before me," Justice Jahangiri said.

He questioned the logic behind adding a political leader's name to the ECL for organising a rally, noting that no cases involving gangs or terrorists have been brought before him.

The court inquired about the cases against MNA Zartaj Gul who has been appointed as the parliamentary leader of the SIC.

Osama Tariq Advocate, her counsel, stated that replies had been submitted for cases 567 and 340, and both were under urgent miscellaneous applications.

The court confirmed that she was on bail in both cases.