PERVERSION OF JUSTICE
Grooming gang leader who preyed on young girls fights deportation – and he’s using human rights
THE leader of an Asian grooming gang that preyed on girls as young as 13 is trying to use human rights laws to avoid being kicked out of Britain.
Shabir Ahmed, 63, claims he is the victim of a conspiracy to ‘scapegoat’ Muslims, an immigration tribunal heard yesterday.
The case will once again spark fears about how foreign criminals are trying to exploit human rights laws to remain in the country.
Ahmed, known as Daddy, was jailed for 22 years in 2012 after being convicted of befriending vulnerable teenagers, plying them with alcohol and raping them.
Despite ruining the lives of dozens of young girls in Rochdale, he yesterday claimed he was being wronged after Home Secretary Theresa May decided to deport him to Pakistan.
He appeared before the First Tier Immigration Tribunal in Manchester to appeal against her decision to strip him of his British citizenship, the first stage of the process.
He is also appealing to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
The divorced father of four told yesterday’s hearing he had been convicted by ‘eleven white jurors’. He added: ‘It has become fashionable to blame everything on Muslims these days.’
Speaking about the Home Secretary he added: ‘She says all her trouble is coming from Muslims, yet she’s the biggest trouble causer in the world.’ The takeaway worker is appealing by claiming his trial was ‘institutionally racist’.
In another kick in the teeth for his victims, the court heard he had written to the ECHR claiming
it was all part of a conspiracy to besmirch Muslims. Vinesh Mandalia, representing the Home Office, told the tribunal that Ahmed, who is also a Pakistani national, was being deprived of his British citizenship because it was considered ‘conducive to the public good’.
He said Ahmed’s appeal included a plea to the ECHR that his criminal convictions were unsafe – which would fall under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, guaranteeing a fair trial.
Mr Mandalia added: ‘The public interest weighs heavily in favour of the Secretary of State to ensure those granted the benefits of British citizenship, however that comes to arise, know the responsibilities that go with it.
‘If you get involved in very serious organised crime then one of the consequences of that is that they will be deprived of their British citizenship.’
Ahmed was the ringleader of a child sex exploitation ring grooming girls as young as 13 for sex. If the victims did not submit they were plied with cheap vodka and raped. Ahmed was one of nine Pakistani men jailed at Liverpool Crown Court for a total of 77 years for the horrific sex attacks.
The pervert was given a 19-year sentence for conspiracy, two rapes, aiding and abetting rape, sexual assault and sex trafficking.
He was later jailed for a further 22 years, to run concurrently, for 30 child rapes after a separate trial. The court heard that he repeatedly raped a young Asian girl for more than a decade, treating her as a ‘possession’ to use for his own sexual gratification.
She said she couldn’t remember how old she was the first time Ahmed raped her, but she knew she was so young she still had to stand on a chair to reach the sink.
During the trial he had launched a series of tirades, including one in which he tried to blame Western society for allowing young girls to ‘parade on the streets’ where they could be preyed on by men such as him.
Three judges will decide on Ahmed’s appeal, as well as on appeals by three other men who were part of the same gang and who also face deportation. They are Qari Abdul Rauf, Abdul Aziz and Adil Khan. If the appeals fail all four can take their case to the Upper Tribunal, so any final decision on deportation could be some way off.
The move is the latest in a series of cases in which serious foreign criminals have attempted to avoid being kicked out of Britain by claiming their human rights had been violated. In a move popular with swathes of the public, the Tories have pledged to scrap Labour’s controversial Human Rights Act.
Opposed by a raft of Left-wing ‘luvvies’, the move would – for the first time – acknowledge that rights must be accompanied by responsibilities.