Change law to kick out Rochdale rapist, No 10 urged

[Twiglets1]

Reported in The Telegraph that Labour is facing mounting pressure to change immigration laws immediately so that a child rapist freed from jail can be deported.

Shabir Ahmed, 73, was sentenced to more than 20 years in jail after being convicted of 30 child rape offences as part of the Rochdale grooming gang.

But on Thursday, the Pakistan-born rapist was released after serving 14 years.

Britain stripped him of his citizenship, but cannot currently deport him because of protections granted to Commonwealth immigrants such as Ahmed under the Immigration Act 1971.

On Thursday, Downing Street said the Prime Minister had asked Shabana Mahmood, the Home Secretary, to “consider what can be done” to deport Ahmed, describing his case as “particularly heinous”.

It comes after Andy Burnham, expected to succeed Sir Keir Starmer as prime minister, also vowed to “review all options” to deport the "vile criminal".

The amendment to Ms Mahmood’s immigration bill will propose rewriting the 1971 act to permit the removal of serious criminals such as Ahmed.

However, even if an amendment were to pass, two senior Pakistani government officials told The Telegraph that the country would not accept Ahmed back because he renounced his Pakistani citizenship “several decades ago”.

They added that he posed a danger to Pakistani children.

If their claim is correct, it places Ahmed in the same situation as two other freed Pakistani ringleaders of the Rochdale grooming gang whom Pakistan has refused to take back.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/02/deport-foreign-born-child-rapists-demand-labour-mps/

He is not ours. He was given a visa aged 10, that permitted him to live in the UK.

He was not British at birth.

He is no longer welcome.

If he's not ours then the visa he and others were given needed to be worded that his right to remain was conditional upon no serious crimes being committed.

These visas could be worded differently in future and maybe this case has highlighted why they need to be.

The law is written down. Not that 'don't rape children' should need to be.

He broke his side of the agreement, to an extreme level.

I'm fine with us going back on what we said in return.

Him breaking the law re child rape means he had to go to prison, which he did.

The law as it stands does not state he needs to be returned to the country he was born in or that they need to accept him.

Laws can change, and in this case should.

We have no responsibility to keep him here.

The UK issues hundreds of thousands of visas to Pakistani citizens every year: visitors, students, workers, family re-unification. If Pakistan won't take back their criminals, those visas need to all stop immediately until they do. We can't let in people whose country we can't rely on to take them back.

Yes, I agree. The fault lies with the short sightedness and complacency of the original legislation. British citizenship should be conditional and abusing and torturing British children should definitely be enough for someone to have that citizenship revoked, regardless of when they first entered the UK and that means the govt needs to find a way to send him back to where he came from.

I'm not really happy with our government issuing hundreds of thousands of visas to the citizens of a country where women and girls have really low status and it's commonplace for families to sell their very young daughters to middle aged men.

That doesn't sound like a good idea to me at all. Considering the nature of Pakistani culture, maybe the grooming gang scandal was inevitable.

Many, many countries don't allow children who are in the country on their parents' visa to remain once they reach adulthood.

The UK's immigration laws - where once one member of the family gets a visa, their entire extended family can come too - are ridiculous.

He is not ours, and he's not our problem.

He's cost us way too much already: both financially and in enormous harm to our children and our society.

The 'it's not written in the visa' answers on here are part of the UK's problem, epitomised by Starmer giving everything of the UK's away, as soon as he caught sight of any rule or request written by anyone saying he should.

No other country acts like this.

The UK's politicians need to start acting for the UK. That is their responsibility. That is their job.

It is not for them to cause yet more harm to the UK - more harm to our own children, more harm to our own society, more cost (which could be better spent to benefit our own citizens) - just to make sure that nothing bad or uncomfortable ever happens to an evil child rapist from another country.

100% agree. They're globalists to their core and they play to the lawyers and leftists in their own social bubble.

All this is harming British citizens. It's also damaging social cohesion and it causes resentment towards Muslim and other ethnic minority communities.

@strawberrybubblegumHes our problem. He’s certainly not Pakistan’s problem. Unless they agree it is!

He's Pakistani.
He's not British.
He's their problem.

Unless our useless politicians make him our problem, by prioritising absolutely anyone - any country, any foreigner - above the British people as usual.

@strawberrybubblegum Do you not think he would be back there if it was that easy? Why did he serve a prison sentence here? If he’s their problem? It’s not that easy in the real world. Maybe you should negotiate with Pakistan? Just tell them your demands and I am sure they would agree!

He committed a crime here and served a sentence here.

Just as British citizens who commit a crime in another country serve a sentence there.

What makes you think it's so hard to stop issuing all visas to Pakistani citizens until Pakistan take back the ones we're no longer willing to have here?

That's entirely within our right and our power. As a first step.

Tariffs on imports, sanctions, cutting aid are also normal forms of influence. That's a second step.

These aren't even particularly contentious. Why are you so reluctant fot the UK to stand up for itself? Countries less powerful than us regularly do far more...

Plenty of far more serious aggressions are committed against the UK every day. Our enemies stir up political division, commit cyber attacks on our institutions, destroy undersea cables... they give weapons and training to proxies and terrorists, and support attacks against our citizens on our soil.

In the extreme, countries bomb and invade. We have in the past, where necessary (not against a nuclear power)

What countries don't do - if they want to remain countries - is sell out their own citizens and their own future in order to be people-pleasers, and appease absolutely everyone else.

And they don't do whatever they're told to 'because it's the law'. Countries are their own law, based on the power they have.

Putting a boundary in place about who we let into our country - and who we insist another country take back - really, really isn't that hard.

He’s a British citizen. He holds a British passport. That’s the fact of the matter. He’s a British citizen who was convicted in a UK court and served his sentence in the UK justice system. In no way, shape or form is he Pakistan’s problem, however much you might want him to be.

@Blossomtoes

It’s odd how people change the situation to suit their narrative. We have many people who are not British citizens who we really would like to repatriate, but struggle to do so. It’s not easy to solve.

Yes, so many people seem to want to tie us up in legal knots so that we can't negotiate properly with anyone. It's turned the UK into a soft touch, always following the rules while other countries act robustly to defend their own interests.

Maybe we should look at the numbers of visas we give to Pakistan anyway, in view of the fact that Pakistani-heritage grooming gangs have sprung up in towns and cities across the UK.

No he's not, and he does not.

He was not British at birth, and his acquired British nationality has been revoked.

He tried to give up his Pakistani (birth) nationality, but didn't do it properly.

He is now only Pakistani.

This is news to me that Ahmed may not have done it properly but if true, this changes my opinion from thinking there's nothing we can do about it.

From the Telegraph:

Britain disputes that Ahmed has renounced his Pakistani citizenship. Officials say he may have torn up his passport, but claim he did not go through the full process of terminating his citizenship.

It is understood that the UK has been in negotiations with Pakistan over Ahmed’s deportation for a year. Parallel discussions over returning two other ringleaders of the Rochdale grooming gang, who have also sought to avoid deportation by renouncing their citizenship, are also under way.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/16/pakistan-blames-britain-for-rochdale-rapists-crimes/

Thanks for article. Yes, it's unbelievable that these people can enter our country, abuse and torture our children and then expect to remain here for the rest of their lives, while their government insults us by saying their behaviour is our fault. Saying he was 'raised, groomed (!) and spoiled' in the UK.

I would say the attitudes of these criminals were formed more in their mother country, ie that women and girls are worthless.

I blame the parents! Often said and not always fair but in this case I don’t think he would have picked up his demeaning views about women and girls from British culture.

I don't feel very hopeful about this case to be honest. Our government has failed to deport thousands of foreign nationals who have served time in a UK jail and are supposed to be getting deported at the end of their sentence. And yet they are released back into the community in the UK.

No, agreed. The Pakistani govt spokesman knows how to add insult to injury. Sounds like they don't really respect us very much.

He came to the UK as a child. He naturalised as British. He grew up under a culture which looks the other way when vulnerable girls are abused and trafficked. Police, Social services, Education, Council all ignored repeated complaints and left him and his ilk to continue. He his criminal behaviour was in accordance with the society he grew up in.

I posted at the beginning of this thread here: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/politics/5549876-change-law-to-kick-out-rochdale-rapist-no-10-urged?reply=153626112

I’ve seen nothing since to justify inflicting him on Pakistani women and girls.

I assume though, you will be busy lobbying to have the Tates sent back here if convicted of rape and trafficking, since they were born here and actually grew up here.

I don't think it's fair @C8H10N4O2 to say that his criminal behaviour was in accordance with the society he grew up in.

His behaviour was hardly "in accordance" with British society. If he was he wouldn't have served 14 years in jail.

Though it is fair to say the girls who were raped were badly let down by their local police, council, social services, Education, etc.

Yes, I agree. I think his behaviour is much more in accordance with Pakistani society than British society. Why is it that British foreign aid to Pakistan goes towards girls' education? Dont they value girls' education in Pakistan? Maybe they could divert some of the resources they put into their space programme into educating girls.

I strongly suspect that Ahmed and others of his ilk will be able to live out his days comfortably in the UK. But this kind of thing is poisoning our society and no good will come of it.