Government outlines legal change after outrage over offender’s release
The government has set out plans to alter immigration law in a bid to allow the deportation of Shabir Ahmed, the convicted ringleader of the Rochdale grooming gang, following his release from prison on licence earlier this month. Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood told MPs she will amend the Immigration and Asylum Bill to remove a longstanding protection that has, until now, prevented Ahmed’s removal.
The proposed amendment would give the Home Secretary a new power to disapply Section 7 of the Immigration Act 1971 in cases of serious criminality. That section protects certain long‑term residents from deportation, including some Commonwealth citizens who arrived in the UK more than 50 years ago. Ministers argue it should not continue to shield offenders of exceptional severity.
“Our amendment will provide the home secretary with a new power to disapply Section 7 of the Immigration Act 1971 for serious criminals… [It] should not be acting as a bar against removal in cases like that of Shabir Ahmed.”
Ahmed was released on 2 July after serving around 14 years of a sentence imposed in 2012 for rape and other serious sexual offences against girls. Although his conviction made him liable for deportation, the 1971 law prevented removal because he had lived in the UK since before the cut‑off set out in that Act. The Bill passed its second reading in the House of Commons on Monday night, with the Home Secretary confirming the government will table the change as it progresses.
Deportation still depends on agreement from Pakistan
Even if the law is amended, ministers accept that Ahmed cannot be removed without the cooperation of Pakistan. The Home Secretary acknowledged in the Commons that his deportation would still require Islamabad’s consent. On Monday, the government signalled it could consider visa restrictions to encourage cooperation if Pakistan refuses to accept him.
The case has prompted intense public concern in Rochdale and beyond. News of Ahmed’s release and the legal barrier that blocked removal renewed scrutiny of how historic immigration provisions interact with modern deportation powers for serious offenders. By drawing the legal threshold to mirror that used for citizenship deprivation in cases of exceptional severity, ministers say the new power would be tightly targeted at the most egregious crimes.
What is changing and why it matters locally
At present, Section 7 of the 1971 Act restricts removal action against some long‑established residents from Commonwealth countries. The Home Office now intends to create a disapplication power so that this protection cannot be used by offenders convicted of the gravest crimes. While this would not automatically remove Ahmed from the UK, it would clear the domestic legal hurdle that has stopped the Home Office from pursuing deportation to conclusion.
For survivors and communities in Rochdale, the proposed shift is significant: it addresses the gap that allowed a high‑profile offender to remain despite deportation proceedings being sought. However, practical outcomes will still depend on international cooperation. The government says it will keep “all avenues” open to secure removal, but has cautioned MPs that a legal change alone is not sufficient.
Key dates and context
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2012 | Ahmed convicted of rape and other sexual offences |
| 2 July 2026 | Released from prison on licence after serving around 14 years |
| 8 July 2026 | Immigration and Asylum Bill passes second reading in Commons |
| Planned | Government to table amendment to disapply Section 7 for serious criminals |
What happens next
- The Immigration and Asylum Bill proceeds to committee stage, where ministers intend to add the Section 7 disapplication power.
- The Home Office continues to seek Pakistan’s agreement to accept Ahmed if deportation is pursued.
- Possible visa measures may be considered to encourage cooperation, the government indicated.
Local representatives and support services in Rochdale are monitoring developments closely. While the amendment aims to resolve a legal impasse exposed by this case, officials emphasise that any removal action must meet both the new domestic legal test and international return arrangements. The Home Office has reiterated that it will pursue every available route to protect the public while operating within the law.
