Bahrain rejects proposal to give judiciary authority over deportation, travel ban decisions 

The government argues that such a move could undermine its ability to act decisively against internal threats.

As cited by Gulf News, the proposal aimed to amend Article 40 of the Civil and Commercial Execution Law to allow a panel of three judges to oversee cases involving deportation and travel bans for expatriates.

The amendment would have also permitted appeals to be filed within seven days before the High Civil Court. However, the government opposed the move, emphasizing that deportation is a sovereign right and should not be subject to judicial discretion.

The government strongly argued that deportation is a sovereign act, essential for maintaining public order and national security. In a memorandum, officials stressed that deportation decisions should not be influenced by civil claims or judicial review.

“Deportation is a sovereign act, not something to be weighed against private debt claims,” the government’s memorandum stated.

Authorities also warned that giving the judiciary the power to review deportation decisions could hinder the state’s ability to respond quickly to potential internal threats.

The government raised concerns that the proposal could be exploited by expatriates using debt claims to trigger travel bans in an attempt to delay deportation.

“There is nothing in the proposed text to prevent misuse,” the government’s memorandum pointed out.

It argued that the amendment would create legal uncertainty and weaken the enforcement of final court rulings.

Currently, courts can issue travel bans to prevent foreign debtors from fleeing the country, but these orders do not interfere with deportation or administrative removal.

The government also clarified that deportation can be imposed as a supplementary sentence in criminal cases. Once a criminal ruling is final, the deportation must be carried out without delay, and no other body has the authority to alter or delay its effect.