Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood will tell Parliament on 13 July 2026 how the government plans to change the law so that it can deport Shabir Ahmed, the main perpetrator of the Rochdale grooming gang crimes The Guardian.

Before that announcement, victims minister Catherine Atkinson mentioned something on BBC Radio 4 that same morning. She pointed out that Mahmood had previously threatened to cut visas for Angola, Namibia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo until they agreed to take back people living illegally in the UK. "Four months later," Atkinson said, "all three were co-operating" The Guardian. She did not say Pakistan's name or confirm the government would do the same thing to them. She told listeners that Mahmood would have "more to announce on this later today."

Atkinson's comment suggests—though it does not confirm—that the government may use the same visa pressure on Pakistan to force them to accept Ahmed's deportation. Conservatives have previously called for this. But Atkinson did not make a direct threat: she just pointed to something that worked before. This matters because the government wants to look like it is negotiating fairly with Pakistan, a Commonwealth country and an important ally, rather than forcing its hand.

The legal problem and the political opening

Parliament has been debating this for two weeks. On 6 July 2026, MPs discussed the government's plan to change the deportation law, and the opposition said they would support it Hansard. Two days later, the House of Lords had its own debate on 8 July, and one peer said "the only option that should be on the table is the deportation of Shabir Ahmed" Hansard Lords.

On 8 July, the Guardian reported that Mahmood plans to close the legal loophole that is stopping Ahmed's removal The Guardian. The BBC confirmed this the same day BBC. The Telegraph reported separately that the government is also talking to Pakistan directly to get them to agree to accept Ahmed back Telegraph. So the government's approach looks like it is trying negotiation first, with tougher measures waiting in reserve.

Why has this taken so long? The victims told the Sun newspaper they were promised Ahmed would be deported after he was released from prison The Sun. But current deportation law and the fact that Pakistan has not provided Ahmed with the travel documents he needs have kept him in the UK, even though both the government and the opposition agree he should not be here.

Let me explain what the government did with Angola, Namibia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Under UK immigration law, the Home Office can refuse to issue visas to citizens of countries that will not cooperate on sending people back home or providing the paperwork they need. This tool works quietly—countries usually cooperate as soon as they hear about the threat, rather than waiting for the government to actually use it. But Pakistan is very different from those three African nations. Many more people from Pakistan apply for UK visas to work, study, or join family members. If the government and Pakistan get into a fight over this, both sides stand to lose money and damage their relationship. Pakistan has also never liked the government calling these things "penalties." They prefer to negotiate between the two countries directly, through official agreements.

What Mahmood announces this afternoon will tell us whether the government is ready to go public with pressure on Pakistan or if it will keep working quietly behind the scenes. Changing the law is one step. Using visa pressure on Pakistan would be a second, riskier step. Both could happen, but the order matters—it sends different messages to Pakistan and to British voters who have followed this case closely and see it as part of a bigger argument about whether Britain can deport serious criminals.