public interest litigation. This was so despite claims by the Overseas Pakistani Foundation (OPF), stating that the “Ministry of Interior deals with illegal migration, drug trafficking and transfer/extradition of prisoners.” The OPF’s response indirectly refuted the Interior Ministry’s claims by stating that in cases where Pakistan had not signed an extradition treaty with the destination country, the Ministry of Interior could take up the problem with the relevant Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the host country to discuss clemency options. This diffusion of responsibility amongst the actors most able to give redress to prisoners prevents the actual provision of assistance. The Ministry of Interior’s jurisdiction covers the Pakistan Narcotics Control Board, the administration of Pakistan’s Anti Narcotics Force. Their National Anti-Narcotics Policy states that they would “actively participate in bilateral, regional and international efforts to combat Drugs.” The MoI is also responsible for prisoner transfer and extradition treaties with other countries. When required, the Ministry of Interior has stepped up to their role, arranging the extradition and transfer of prisoners, as was the case with the repatriation of Pakistani prisoners from the Bagram prison in Afghanistan, formerly under the control of the U.S. It is important to note, that if adequate investigations were carried out, those who were unfairly arrested could have been saved from a brutal end. It is not unheard of governments campaigning on behalf of their innocent citizens. Cases such as that of Mary Velosovo from the Philippines39 demonstrate the beneficial consequences of domestic authorities adequately investigating and proclaiming the innocence of their falsely imprisoned citizens abroad. However, instead of being patrons of their citizens, Pakistani authorities have failed to respond to several entreaties by the families of detainees and those advocating on their behalf. Figure 1.3 A complaint lodged by the Bureau of Emigration and Overseas Employment against an OEP which requires the complainant to separately go through the FIA after the complaint was handled by the BEOE. The Ministry of Interior is also responsible for domestic regulation such as the Prevention and Control of Human Trafficking Ordinance (PACHTO) 2002 and the Federal Government’s Anti-Human Trafficking Cells (AHTCs), neither of which have managed to significantly curb the problems associated with Pakistan being a source, transit and destination country for migrant smuggling. The conviction rate under PACHTO is 12 percent and sentences are usually light, not fully apprehending facilitators 18