The UK government minister is encountering significant criticism from the British-Pakistani community over threats to impose sanctions on Pakistan if it declines to accept the return of Shabir Ahmed, the ringleader of the Rochdale grooming gang. Ahmed, aged 73, is a convicted child rapist whose deportation has sparked a heated debate within the Pakistani community in the UK.
Senior Pakistani figures in Britain are divided on Ahmed’s deportation. While some support sending him back to Pakistan, others warn that any punitive measures such as visa restrictions or aid cuts could provoke a backlash, potentially harming diplomatic relations between the two countries. They also caution that Shabana Mahmood, the Home Secretary and MP for the Midlands constituency where much of this controversy is centered, may face political repercussions for her campaign to deport Ahmed.
Political rivals within the Pakistani community in Mahmood’s constituency have indicated they intend to leverage the issue in the upcoming election. Akhmed Yakoob, a Birmingham solicitor who narrowly lost to Mahmood in the last election by reducing her majority from nearly 15,000 to about 2,000 votes, has vowed to make the deportation debate a key campaign point if he runs again. Yakoob accused Mahmood of pandering to far-right sentiments by pushing for Ahmed’s deportation, arguing that Britain must take responsibility for its citizens who have lived there for decades.
Yakoob described Ahmed as a “dangerous, dirty criminal” who has brought disgrace upon the communities he lived in. While acknowledging Ahmed deserves severe punishment, he condemned Mahmood’s approach as insincere and politically motivated.
The government is pursuing Ahmed’s deportation following his release earlier this month after serving 14 years of a 22-year sentence for 30 counts of child rape. Mahmood has announced plans to amend the Immigration Act 1971 to close a loophole that currently prevents Ahmed’s deportation despite his UK citizenship being revoked. However, Pakistan refuses to accept Ahmed, citing his renunciation of Pakistani citizenship and his nearly 60 years of residence in the UK.
Lord Shaffaq Mohammed expressed the view that Pakistan should accept Ahmed’s return. He warned that failure to do so could pressure the UK government into taking measures that might damage the longstanding economic and diplomatic ties between the two nations. Mohammed highlighted the risk of harming development assistance programs that benefit some of the world’s poorest populations. He urged both governments to find a practical and constructive resolution to avoid further diplomatic fallout.
Conversely, Ayesha Ijaz Khan, a lawyer and political commentator based in London, argued that Pakistan is justified in refusing to take Ahmed back. She emphasized that Britain cannot shift its legal responsibilities onto other countries and criticized the threat of visa restrictions and financial penalties as inappropriate. Khan noted that Pakistan has never supported Ahmed and has consistently agreed with Britain’s prosecution of him.
Adding to the debate, Taimoor Iqbal, a London-based Pakistani consultant, warned that deporting Ahmed could set a dangerous precedent. He cautioned that future governments might exploit expanded deportation powers to enforce broader policies that disproportionately affect minority communities. Iqbal stressed the importance of safeguarding civil liberties and ensuring equal treatment under the law to protect vulnerable groups from potential abuses.
