Petition filed in Supreme Court to remove Musharraf's name from ECL

Yesterday, interior ministry informed Musharraf that the govt was 'unable' to remove his name from the ECL.

Former president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf. PHOTO: AFP

ISLAMABAD:
Advocate Shah Jahan filed a petition in the Supreme Court requesting it to remove the name of former military ruler General (retd) Pervez Musharraf from the Exit Control List (ECL), Express News reported on Thursday.

The request stated that the former president wanted to visit his ailing mother and therefore his name should be removed from the ECL.

On March 29, it was reported that Musharraf’s mother, Zahra Musharrfa, who has been ill for some time now, was shifted from Dubai to Sharjah’s W Wilson hospital after her condition suddenly worsened.

Earlier, Musharraf had requested permission to visit his mother in Dubai despite having to be in court on March 31, 2014 for a hearing – but this request was dismissed.


Last year, the Sindh High Court (SHC) had put Musharraf’s name on the ECL, asking him not to leave the country without seeking prior permission from the courts concerned over his alleged involvement in several cases.

Shifting the ball in each other's court

On April 2, the government had responded to Musharraf’s request to remove his travel restrictions with an ambiguously worded communiqué, shifting the burden of responsibility on the courts.

The interior ministry had informed the former president that the government was “unable to accede to his request” of removing his name from the ECL “on the basis of record pronouncements of the superior courts.”

After the Special Court had read out charges to him on March 31 in the treason case for subverting and circumventing the Constitution of Pakistan by imposing emergency on November 3, 2007, Musharraf had filed an application seeking removal of his name from the ECL so that he could travel abroad to seek medical treatment and see his ailing mother. The court, however, had said it did not have jurisdiction over the matter and it was for the government to decide.
Load Next Story