Sammi Deen Baloch
Cases- Location of case in SG report
- 2025-086-001
- Year of the report
- 2025
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 30.375321
Longitude: 69.3451159999999
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- Pakistan
- From Region
- UN body that raised the case prior to the SG report
- UN Special Procedures: Thematic
- Dates of prior UN action
- 7 October 2024; 26 March 2025; 29 April 2025
- Type of record
- Named individual
- Gender
- Female
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- No
- Was the victim a minor?
- No
- Individual's/organization's activity
Ms. Baloch is the General Secretary of the Voice for Baloch Missing Persons, a non governmental organization that represents families of victims of enforced disappearance in Balochistan and has a history of engagement with the United Nations on this issue
- Type of rights defended
- Caste/Ethnic minorities' rights/Racism
- Civil/political rights
- Was the victim a civil servant or member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- No
- Reported trigger of reprisal
arbitrary travel restrictions against human rights defender Ms. Sammi Deen Baloch, that prevented her engagement with the Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances and her participation in the 57th session of the Human Rights Council.
- Engagement with UN body
- UN Special Procedures: thematic
- UN Human Rights Council: UN Human Rights Council - General
- Dates of engagement
- September 2024
- Type of attempted engagement
- Participation in meeting on UN premises
- Dates of mentioned reprisals
- 8 September 2024; 23 March 2025
- Location of mentioned reprisals
- Pakistan
- Reprisal information
Ms. Baloch had planned to travel to Geneva to meet with United Nations human rights experts in the context of the 134th session of the Working Group, scheduled from 16 to 25 September 2024 during 57th session of the Human Rights Council. On 8 September 2024, when presenting her passport to immigration officials at Karachi Airport, Ms. Baloch was reportedly told that her name had been put on an ‘Exit Control List’. Her passport was reportedly confiscated for at least four hours, and when it was returned, it contained an exit control stamp. Reportedly, Ms. Baloch decided not to attempt travelling again out of fear that her passport could be confiscated permanently (UA PAK 4/2024).
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Charge/Investigation/Prosecution: Charge/Investigation/Prosecution - General
- Detention/Imprisonment: Detention/Imprisonment - General
- Travel restriction
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- No
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- No
- Further case development
Mandate holders expressed concerns at the alleged arbitrary travel restrictions imposed against Ms. Baloch that prevented her engagement with the Working Group, which had been reported as an act of intimidation and reprisal for her international advocacy, including her engagement with the United Nations human rights mechanisms on the issue of enforced disappearances in Balochistan. They further noted that the travel prohibition against Ms. Sammi Deen Baloch creates a chilling effect in society, whereby individuals working for the rights of victims of human rights violations are dissuaded from doing so out of fear of reprisals. 89. On 26 March 2025, mandate holders issued a press release mentioning that two days earlier, Ms. Sammi Deen Baloch had been arrested alongside other human rights defenders by the Karachi Police as they protested police violence against the Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC), a network advocating for the rights of the minority Baloch community. Her detention was allegedly ordered for 30 days under the Sindh Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance (MPO). Mandate holders called for the immediate release of. Ms. Saami Deen Baloch and other activists, including human rights defender Ms. Mahrang Baloch, leader of BYC. In a 26 March press release replying to the statement of mandate holders, the government alleged that “these elements are not mere protesters but active participants in a broader campaign of lawlessness and violence (...), operating in collusion with terrorists.” 90. On 29 April 2025, mandate holders publicly stated that Pakistan appears to conflate legitimate human and minority rights advocacy and public demonstrations with terrorism, threatening freedoms of expression, assembly, and association. They expressed concern at the detention of BYC leaders and their supporters and actions against their family members and lawyers, noting these may amount to reprisals for their interaction with United Nations mechanisms.
- Government response dates
- 26 March 2025; 23 July 2025
- Government response content
In a 26 March press release replying to the statement of mandate holders, the government alleged that “these elements are not mere protesters but active participants in a broader campaign of lawlessness and violence (...), operating in collusion with terrorists.”
On 23 July 2025, the Government responded to the note verbale sent in connection to the present report, stating that the allegation of intimidation and reprisals was unfounded. It further asserted that the actions of the relevant authorities were consistent with the law and Pakistan’s obligations under international human rights law, and that domestic remedies remained available and were being applied. The Government also reaffirmed its commitment to freedom of movement and noted that international human rights law permitted restrictions necessary to protect national security, public order, public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others.
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- No
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- No
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- No