Rana Ayyub Challenges Travel Restrictions By ED, Moves Delhi High Court

Journalist Rana Ayyub has approached the Delhi High Court, challenging Enforcement Directorate's action of restraining her from leaving the country.

The matter was mentioned today before the Bench of Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Navin Chawla.

Ayyub's counsel had prayed for an early listing, stating that she is due to travel to London and Italy, owing to her prior commitments. He added that her flight leaves tomorrow.

The Bench told the counsel that in case he files the matter today before 11 AM, it will be listed tomorrow.

Ayyub, accused in an alleged money laundering case being investigated by the ED, was stopped from flying to London on Tuesday. She was stopped at the Mumbai airport.

In this backdrop, the plea prays a direction that Ayyub be enabled to travel out of India, and that any order, Look Out Circular, instruction or direction preventing her from travelling abroad be quashed and set aside.

Stating that Ayyub is an Indian investigative female journalist and a global opinions writer at the Washington Post, the plea states that Ayyub was detained on March 29, 2022 in a room adjacent to the immigration counter and was informed that the immigration officers of Bureau of Immigration were seeking clarifications regarding some "remark" on her file. 

The plea further avers that Ayyub was then informed, that the immigration officers had instructions from theEnforcement Directorate to not allow her to board her flight to London, and accordingly her immigration stamp on her passport was stamped as "Cancelled". 

The plea states that when Ayyub requested the immigration officers to furnish any written communication or order barring her from travelling to attend journalism related events in London, nothing was shown her, however she was informed that the ED will be emailing summons to her, thereby forming the basis for the decision to disallow her from travelling. 

According to the plea, almost two hours after Ayyu  had been detained at the airport, ED emailed summons to her under The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 directing her to appear before it on April 1.

The plea thus avers that the information sought in the summon was a copy of the information already sought by ED in an earlier summon dated January 25, 2022. It further states that the information which had been relied upon by ED in its original complaint, a Show Cause Notice has already been issued to her on March 8, 2022, for which she is due to file a detailed reply within the stipulated time frame by April 17.

"Thus the summon dt. 29.02.2022 is a clear sham exercise, and an afterthought, to try and legitimise the illegal and arbitrary action of the Respondent No. 1 on the instructions of the Respondent No. 2, to deny the Petitioner her fundamental right to travel as well as her fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression, inter-alia to speak at a journalism related event in London and then in Perugia near Rome, in Italy, regarding the gender based online violence faced by women journalists globally," the plea adds.

Accordingly, it has been argued in the plea that Ayyub had responded to each and every summon issued by the ED, and has also joined the investigation and recorded her statement and provided necessary documents. Therefore, there is nothing on record to suggest that she was evading the legal process.

"There is no cogent reason or ground for issuance of a Look Out Circular against the Petitioner as she has cooperated with the investigation throughout and has been in regular communication with the Respondent No. 2. There is no flight risk and the Petitioner has not evaded the legal process," the plea states.

Stating further that Ayyub being a journalist who speaks truth to power and is at times perceived to be "a source of some discomfort or inconvenience for the government", the plea argues that the same is no ground to deny her the right to travel abroad and exercise her freedom of speech and expression, as well as to practise her profession as a journalist. 

"Dissenting voices are integral to the democratic society and polity envisaged by the Indian Constitution, and any mala fide or arbitrary action of the Respondents which unconstitutionally curbs free speech ought to be quashed and set aside by constitutional courts," the plea reads.