Gulam Rabbani :
Immigration officials at the Hazrat Shahjalal International Airport (HSIA) bar many of the citizens on different occasions while going abroad without issuing any prior notice or arrest warrant which causes serious harassment to them. It obstructs movement in spite of having all kinds of valid documents and it violates travellors Constitutional rights.
Travel bans are usually imposed on notorious criminals or corrupt suspects. However, apart from this, various political leaders and activists and businessmen are also being barred in immigration while going abroad without prior notice. They come to know about the bar only when they reach the airports or any other ports.
In a verdict delivered in 2017, a High Court Bench said, “In absence of any custodial order passed by a competent court of law, no request can be lawfully made to the immigration authorities to prevent a citizen from leaving the country. If any such request is made or entertained by the immigration authorities, the same would have the effect of undermining the rule of law and violating a citizen’s constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights.”
“Therefore, such restriction or embargo is illegal and unconstitutional if any request is made from any other authorities preventing a citizen going abroad without assigning any reason that would be violation of fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution,” also read the verdict.
Tafsir Awal is a regular traveler and wanted to visit UK as part of his regular journey to this destination in January 2021. He went to the airport on January 24 in 2021 to board the Biman Bangladesh flight scheduled for London where the immigration authority off boarded him without any prior notice citing that they have instruction from their higher officials not to allow him to leave the country.
Later it was recovered that the ACC on October 4 in 2020 without filing any case against him has imposed a travel ban on him. Then Awal moved a writ petition before the High Court. Upon hearing the High Court bench of Justice M Enayetur Rahim and Justice Sardar Md Rashed Jahangir on May 5 in 2021 pleased to issue a rule and directing ACC to allow Awal to leave and re-enter the country.
BNP leader Syed Moazzem Hossain Alal was stopped at Shahjalal International Airport at different times while going abroad in recent years without any prior notice or legal proceedure. However, the High Court later declared these obstructions as illegal.
Md Abdullah Al Masud Chowdhury, Additional Secretary (Security and Immigration Wing) of the Security Service Division of the Home Ministry, declined to make any comment on whether this obstruction can be defined under any legal frame.
An official of the Immigration Police at HSIA on condition of anonymity said they bar only those persons who don’t have valid or necessary documents or the persons against whom serious criminal or other allegations have been reported.
According to the Article 36 of the Constitution, “Subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the public interest, every citizen shall have the right to move freely throughout Bangladesh, to reside and settle in any place therein and to leave and re-enter Bangladesh.”
However, in a full text of a verdict released in December 2021, the apex court observed, “The fundamental right guaranteed under Article 36 of the Constitution of Bangladesh is non-absolute right. The right to leave one’s country has therefore never been considered an absolute right. The right may be restricted in certain circumstances.”
“Article 36 of the Constitution permits imposition of restrictions. However, such restrictions must be by way of the law enacted and must be reasonably needed in the public interest. Without backing of law imposition of restriction on the freedom of movement by an executive order will be unconstitutional,” it said.
“Restriction may be imposed on travel in order to prevent exit from the country by persons who leave quickly to avoid due process of law. However, this would be subject to confirmation by the appropriate court within a period of three working days,” the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court said in the verdict.
