High court orders Nadra to renew couple’s CNICs within 15 days

The Sindh High Court (SHC) has quashed the National Database & Registration Authority’s (Nadra) show-cause notice to a Pakistani couple with regard to the blocking of their computerised national identity cards (CNICs), and directed the agency to renew them within 15 days.

The order came on a petition of Abu Hashim and others against the issuance of show-cause notices by Nadra with regard to the cancellation of their CNICs and for the restoration of their cards.

They said Nadra had issued show-cause notices to them on May 3, 2017 that their CNICs had been blocked, with the allegation that the petitioners had provided inaccurate information, but no specific details were mentioned in the notices.

They said they had provided all the requisite information and responded to all the queries, following which they were informed by Nadra on November 25, 2017 that their CNICs would be unblocked within a month, but their cards had not been restored yet, because of which they had been facing many difficulties, including the non-functioning of their bank accounts.

The petitioners’ counsel said that there was no provision under the Nadra Ordinance 2000 for blocking CNICs. He said that due to such illegality, neither could the petitioners travel outside the country nor operate their bank accounts, which amounted to the violation of their fundamental rights guaranteed under articles 9, 14, 15 and 18 of the constitution.

The counsel said that the impugned notices neither stipulated any reasons nor afforded any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, which was a violation of Article 10-A of the constitution and Section 24-A of the General Clauses Act, so the notices were liable to be quashed, with directions to Nadra to unblock the CNICs of the petitioners.

Nadra’s counsel argued that the petitioners failed to prove their national status according to the Ministry of Interior’s notification dated April 19, 2017. He claimed petitioner Abu Hashim had been issued his first NIC in 1982 on the basis of fake particulars, so his case fell in the doubtful category, and the petitioners were responsible to produce residential proof prior to 1978 in Pakistan for the clearance of a complex case.

He said the show-cause notices were served under Section 18 of the Nadra Ordinance 2000 to provide a fair opportunity for clearance, but the petitioners failed to provide residential proof prior to 1978, and due to non-production of the required documents, the zonal board of Nadra recommended the cases to a district level committee (DLC) for further investigation and verification of their national status as per the interior ministry’s notification.

After hearing the arguments of the counsel, an SHC division bench headed by Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar said that the purpose of providing a procedure for the cancellation and confiscation of the ID cards by the legislature did not mean that the powers be exercised callously or recklessly.

The court said that the guiding principle under the law was that there must be some reason to believe, and the phrase “reason to believe” should not be based on a figment of imagination but on substantial and definite information, and not on vague allegations.

The bench said that the show-cause notice may have be issued under the Nadra Ordinance 2000, but there must also be a reason to believe that the person was ineligible and had been issued an ID card or that their card was forged.

The court said that the nitty-gritty of Section 18 of the Nadra Ordinance explicated the power to cancel, impound or confiscate the card as an eventual punitive action, but no powers were integrated or en suite to block the CNIC of any person unless it was finally determined or adjudicated that the card issued to any such person should be cancelled, impounded or confiscated.

The bench said that before deciding the fate of the show-cause notices, there was no provision under the Nadra Ordinance to block the CNIC of a citizen, and any such action beyond the scope of law made a person neither here nor there.

The court said that even according to the standard operating procedures issued by the Nadra operations director general to all the regional headquarters of the agency, complex cases were those that were blocked as confirmed alien or non-national on the basis of agency reports and referred to be dealt with by a DLC.

The bench said that nothing was produced by Nadra’s counsel that showed that any complaint was received against the petitioners that they were ineligible to be issued CNICs, nor was there any agency report against them that would warrant their cases to be treated as complex cases and be referred to a DLC.

The court said Nadra’s counsel could not deny the authenticity and genuineness of the documents submitted by the petitioners, except relying on Section 18 of the Nadra Ordinance.

The bench said that it was also strange as to why the earlier CNICs issued to the petitioners were not taken into consideration when the same department or their predecessors had issued them.

The court said that if there was such a level of mismanagement at Nadra, and cards were issued with the connivance of staff members, what action had been taken against such culprits, which issue also remained unaddressed by the agency.

The bench said that domicile, earlier passports and even the marriage certificate of the petitioners were rejected solely for the reason that these documents were issued after 1978.

However, added the court, there was no rationale or commonsensical logic as to why the 1978 cut-off date had been laid down in the interior ministry’s letter, and what was the fate of those who were not registered prior to 1978, and whether they would be treated as alien in the country despite having citizenship.

The bench said that the proper course was to verify the documents from the authorities who had issued them, rather than putting the petitioners under pressure and in an embarrassing situation to prove their identity and citizenship in Pakistan after such a long time.

The court said that the whys and wherefores led to a finale that neither could Nadra demonstrate any cogent justification that the documents produced by the petitioners were forged or manipulated nor could the agency satisfy or expound any rationale as to why the documents were unacceptable to them.

The bench said that nor could Nadra demonstrate that there were reasons to believe that the petitioners secured the documents, including the previous NICs and CNICs, passports and domicile on the basis of some fraud or misrepresentation or impersonation, so the blocking of the CNICs was unlawful.

The high court quashed Nadra’s show-cause notice issued under Section 18 of the Nadra Ordinance and directed the agency to renew the CNICs of the petitioners within 15 days.