[ad_1]
The Supreme Court will examine next week the legality of the Union government’s action of blacklisting foreigners who participated in the Tablighi Jamaat event held in Delhi in March 2020, effectively preventing them from entering India for the next 10 years, without giving them an opportunity to be heard.
The bench of justices AM Khanwilkar, AS Oka and CT Ravikumar said, “The government can deny visa if you have information that the person is suspected to be a spy. But if you grant visa, can you unilaterally cancel it without giving him an opportunity. And then can you blacklist anyone without giving notice to the individual?”
The observation came during the hearing of a petition by 35 foreign nationals who entered India on a valid visa to participate in the Tablighi Jamaat event and were slapped with a general order blacklisting them besides being charged with criminal offences.
The petitioners were aggrieved by the April 2, 2020, decision of the ministry of home affairs (MHA) to blacklist 960 foreigners of 35 countries.
They were not allowed to travel to India for the next 10 years. Two months later, MHA blacklisted an additional 2,500 foreigners for their participation in Tablighi Jamaat event and directed states and Union Territories to file FIRs against them.
The petitioners claimed that the orders against them were passed without hearing them and this restricted their rights under Article 21 which is a universal human right. They also demanded MHA to remove them from the blacklist and reinstate their visas.
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Centre, said, “It can be done as that is the law. For a nation, this raises serious questions of law. On a matter of principle, the country has a sovereign right to deny anyone the right to enter. Visa is, after all, a permission to enter the country. Forget this incident of Tablighi Jamaat, we are on the larger issue as there could be myriad situations where this question can come up.”
The bench said, “Not giving visa is not an issue before us. If a person is blacklisted, it has a consequence. If he applies to re-enter, blacklisting will come in his way. Can it be done unilaterally? Show us judgments that support your point. It seems to be a doubtful proposition to us.”
Mehta told the court that the blacklisting order was passed when the petitioners were found to have gathered at the event held in the capital from where they spread out to other place, which were in violation of the Covid protocols issued at that time by the government.
”If these people would have come as a group, you could have issued notice to the group leader before blacklisting. But if they came from different places at different points of time, you need to give notice to each of them. They should have an opportunity to respond. Else, how do they know on what basis you came to that conclusion,” the court said.
Senior advocate Salman Khurshid, representing a set of foreigners, told the judges that the Centre’s power to regulate visas to foreigners is not in dispute. “How can we support anyone who is inimical to the country’s interest? But you can’t imagine things and say that I will blacklist you without giving us a chance to explain.”
[ad_2]
Source link
Feng Die s hands slowly what can reduce high blood pressure lifted from both sides of her body and slowly rose tadalafil cialis from india people who drink a lot also do some mysterious thing that increases their likelihood of BC
priligy tablets Given the retrospective nature of the data in this field thus far, the potential effect of publication bias cannot be excluded, favoring small positive studies compared to small negative studies