Ayyan Malik was finally allowed to leave the country as per the orders of the Supreme Court. The interior ministry’s appeal to keep Ayyan Malik in the ECL (Exit Control List) was discarded by Supreme Court, upholding the Sindh High Court’s earlier verdict on the matter.
A three-member bench headed by Chief Justic Saqib Nisar head the appeal. The judge passed a remark saying that the Government wanted to keep the super-model in the country by hook or by crook.
A Background of Ayyan Malik’s Case
Ayyan Malik was nominated in the case of the murder of a customs officer killed in 2015. This customs officer was investigating the money laundering case against the super-model for carrying $500,000 in a suitcase.
The Bench’s Argument
The bench argued with the government lawyer as to how many nominated murderers’ names were put on the ECL list before.
Justice Nisar inferred that the referee judge of Sindh High Court had given the right verdict in this case. The Chief Justice regretted that a long time had passed since the time an FIR (First Information Report) was registered back in the year 2015, however, the investigation of this case had not been completed so far.
Interior Ministry Challenging Ayyan SHC’s Decision
The Interior Ministry challenged the verdict of Sindh High Court maintaining that the model’s name had to be put on the ECL on Punjab’s request. And SHC could not remove the name from the ECL.
In its original verdict given on Jan 19th, Sindh High Court had ordered the authorities to strike-off Ayyam Malik’s name from the ECl. However, it later suspended its order for 10 more days on the request of the Federal Government.
SHC Chief Justice Syed Ali Shah appointed Justice Phulpoto as a referee judge to decide Ayyan Malik’s petition when one of the judges on division bench approved her plea of removing her name from the ECL while the other rejected it.
The interior ministry had removed Ayyan’s name from the ECL on court’s orders but it was later included within a few hours. The model filed a contempt of court petition against Federal Government, taking the stance that she was barred from leaving the country despite of court’s orders.
