Put Him in the Witness Box: Compel the BEAST – Shabir Ahmed to Testify

This depraved satanic beast from Pakistan, Shabir Ahmed, was permitted to enter these Isles –  the very embodiment of evil who lurked and preyed on young white girls within the shadows of what was once a proud, resilient country – one whose indigenous people tilled the soil, were violently displaced through land clearances in Scotland, and subjected to slavery and serfdom under a corrupt ruling class. These brave souls fought bloody battles on these Isles, defending their dignity and their homeland. Yet, since the last world war, this nation has been slowly decaying from within. Its strength has been eroded by systemic corruption and neglect, and by a culture that sheltered monsters like Ahmed for years, many of whom also operate in the shadows, watching and acting within the corridors of power in both government, NGO’s and religious establishments. But the spirit of our ancestors is stirring at the loss of this once sacred land. They will rise again, not as a memory, but as a force. From the graves and their displaced homelands, from the stories told in secret and the grief carried in silence, they will return with clarity, with unity, and with the unbreakable resolve of people who have already endured betrayal and survived it. They will not beg for what was stolen; they will claim what was theirs, demand justice, expose the rot, and rebuild a future where the dignity of the indigenous lives is protected, honored, and never again used as a bargaining chip by those in the shadows – who will be exposed!

THINK!
Do the watchers sit in our government, hidden in plain sight?
Have we been swallowed by a Trojan horse so large, so incideous and quiet that no one heard it enter?

They don’t need to storm the gates. They move like smoke through the corridors of power, threading themselves between meetings and mandates, learning our habits, speaking our language, building trust one careful word at a time.
While we argue over the surface, they study the seams. And, the danger isn’t the enemy who shows his face. It’s the traitor who belongs to the insider, close enough to pass unnoticed, close enough to direct the blow.

As Cicero warned, “a nation can endure fools and even the ambitious, but it cannot withstand treason from within: an open enemy is feared because he is known, while the quiet saboteur slips freely among those who should be guarding the gate.”

Keir Starmer was knighted in 2014 for services to criminal justice. Pic: PA

 

 

So the question isn’t whether threats exist?
The question is whether we’ve mistaken loyalty for disguise, and whether we’ll recognise the whisper before it becomes policy, before it becomes law, before it becomes the reality we can’t take back.

 

 

Today, creatures like Ahmed roam freely across the land – Britain, permitted to stay, operate, and commit their crimes with impunity. How was he allowed to continue for so long? Because people like him are protected, by complicity, cover-ups, and systemic failures. That’s how he was able to behave like a man with permission, with a sense of entitlement that grew from the knowledge that he could act without fear of consequence.

 

Study how Ahmed operated.

He raped children while holding a council job. He trafficked girls while sitting as a director of the Citizens Advice Bureau. He carried on for years after the first complaint reached the police in 2005. Men who fear the law hide from it. Ahmed worked openly from a desk in a public building. That sense of entitlement is proof, evidence that impunity is learned behavior. Somebody somewhere, at some point, gave him reason to believe he was untouchable.

The inquiry should ask him the simplest question of all: Why were you never afraid? The answer lies with those who protected him, who turned a blind eye, or who deliberately shielded him from justice. Their decisions allowed him to continue his depravity for decades.

Shabir Ahmed, the man his victims were forced to call “Daddy” was the ringleader of the Rochdale grooming gang. In August 2012, at Liverpool Crown Court, he was convicted of rape, aiding and abetting rape, sexual assault, and trafficking a child for sexual exploitation. He was one of nine men found guilty of abusing girls as young as thirteen.¹

And here is the fact that must never be allowed to fade: he did it while drawing a public salary. Ahmed was employed as a welfare rights officer by Oldham Council from 1988 to 2006, seconded to the Oldham Pakistani Community Centre. He offended while working from a desk paid for by the public.²

Men who fear the law hide from it. Ahmed operated in the open. That should tell you everything, because a sense of impunity is not innate. It is learned. Somebody, somewhere, gave him reason to believe he was untouchable. The inquiry should put to him the simplest and most damning question of all: why were you never afraid?

The failures have authors

Every protection Ahmed enjoyed was a decision, made by a named person, at a specific moment.

In 2005, Greater Manchester Police failed to tell Oldham Council about an allegation of serious sexual assault against a man the council employed to help vulnerable people. In 2008, allegations against him were discussed in Rochdale, and again Oldham was not warned.

In 2012, when a young woman came forward to say Ahmed had abused her, children’s social care closed the case within days,  no assessment, no investigation.³ And there was Sophie, twelve years old, who walked into Oldham police station in 2006 to report being raped and was told to come back when she was “not drunk.”⁴

The 2022 independent review by Malcolm Newsam and Gary Ridgway spent more than two years examining this. It found serious, multiple failures by both GMP and Oldham Council   and worse, institutions “more concerned about covering up their failures” than admitting them.⁵ The documents record what was done. Only people can explain why.

Only he can answer the questions that matter

Ahmed did not run chaos. He ran a system, flats above takeaways, girls moved between towns by car, money changing hands. He knows how it was structured, how it was financed, how new victims were found and passed along. That model did not die when he was jailed. Versions of it survive in towns across the country. The man who built the machine can explain the machine, and there is no substitute for that when the goal is protecting children now.

Then there is the question the state has spent more than a decade failing to answer: who bought the children? The men convicted in 2012 were part of it. The buyers, the customers who paid for access to those girls, have never stood trial. Ahmed met people through his official position. If anyone knows names, faces, and standing, it is him. No investigation has ever been allowed near that list. An inquiry with the power to compel him could be the thing that finally forces it into the light.

They fought this inquiry at every turn

The inquiry now coming to Oldham exists in spite of the government, not because of it and the resistance came from Sir Keir Starmer’s own mouth, on the record, again and again.

He insisted the earlier inquiry, concluded under Professor Alexis Jay in 2022, had been “comprehensive,” and that the scandal “just needs action” rather than another investigation.⁶

On 8 January 2025, Labour MPs were whipped to vote down a proposed national inquiry, defeating it 364 to 111, a move the opposition condemned as turning a blind eye to justice for the victims.⁷

The very next day, his official spokesman claimed the victims themselves did not want another national inquiry.⁸ As late as Prime Minister’s Questions on 30 April 2025, Starmer was still insisting that prosecutions, the existing Jay recommendations, and local inquiries were response enough.⁹

That is a nine month trail of resistance, in his own words. It ended only in June 2025, after Baroness Casey’s audit, a reversal forced by sustained pressure and the threat of a parliamentary vote, not offered by conscience.¹⁰ And the misgivings did not stop when the inquiry began: survivors on its own liaison panel have since resigned, one describing the process as feeling like a coverup.¹¹

So the inquiry was fought, resisted, and conceded only when refusing it became politically impossible. But it now holds one power that all the foot dragging cannot undo: it can compel testimony. Oldham is among the first areas it will examine.¹²

That power must be used, starting with the man who ran the machine.

Two facts that belong side by side

There was a coverup. That is not a suspicion, it is the finding of the independent review, which described institutions in Oldham as more concerned with concealing their own failures than confronting them. Bodies that existed to protect children instead protected themselves. That is the documented culture in which Ahmed operated, unchecked, for years. And it is the pattern seen again and again in these scandals, in Rotherham, in Rochdale, in Oldham, where the first instinct of those in charge was to manage the damage to their own reputations rather than to rescue the children being abused on their watch.

Now set beside it the second fact. When the chance finally came to expose that culture on a national scale, the Prime Minister spent nine months resisting it. He called the previous inquiry sufficient. He whipped his MPs to vote a national inquiry down. He had it briefed that the victims did not want one. He insisted local reviews would do. He conceded only when refusal became politically impossible.

Put those two facts against each other and a question rises on its own, needing no embellishment: why would anyone fight so hard, for so long, to prevent the very scrutiny that would bring this into the light? Those with nothing to fear from the truth do not labour to obstruct the search for it. That resistance does not, by itself, prove intent, but it demands an answer, and it is exactly the kind of decision a statutory inquiry now has the power to examine. Every act of resistance, like every failure that came before it, had an author who made a choice. The inquiry should put to each of them the same question it must put to Ahmed:  why?

He has scores to settle

Ahmed is 73. He was released on license in July 2026, living under supervision, electronically tagged, subject to an exclusion zone, banned from any contact with children, abandoned by everyone who once found him useful.¹³

And he has evaded the one consequence his victims were expressly promised: removal from the country. His British citizenship was revoked in 2016 to enable his deportation, yet he remains. He claims to have torn up his Pakistani passport and renounced that citizenship, a claim the British government disputes, while Pakistan refuses to take him back, insisting he is no longer its citizen; and a pre1973 exemption in the Immigration Act 1971 bars his removal in any event.

The people who benefited from his presence in their institutions have spent years pretending they never knew him.

Put a man like that under oath, and test every word against the records and the witnesses, and you get something his former protectors should dread. Where he lies, it marks what he is still guarding. Where he tells the truth, careers end and prosecutions begin.

His victims waited years while he worked from a council desk. The men who bought them have never seen a courtroom. The people and institutions that failed those children have never been made to account for it. Does Ahmed receive his council pension?? This question needs requires an answer.

 

The National Inquiry is coming to Oldham. It has the power to subpoena him. Use it. Make him talk.

Share this. Demand that the inquiry compel his testimony. These children were owed justice twenty years ago —
the least we can do now is refuse to let the questions go unasked.

Fully sourced edition — every factual claim is referenced in the footnotes.

1. Conviction (August 2012, Liverpool Crown Court — rape, aiding and abetting rape, sexual assault, trafficking; one of nine men convicted; victims as young as 13; known to victims as “Daddy”). GB News, “Rochdale rape gang ringleader cannot be deported due to loophole.” https://www.gbnews.com/news/rochdalerapegangringleadercannotbedeportedloophole — Manchester Mirror, “Rochdale abuse ringleader set free as deportation blocked” (30 June 2026). https://manchestermirror.co.uk/crime/rochdalecrime/rochdaleabuseringleadersetfreeasdeportationblocked/
2. Employed as a welfare rights officer by Oldham Council 1988–2006, seconded to the Oldham Pakistani Community Centre. Oldham Chronicle, “Oldham CSE Report: Rochdale grooming gang ringleader was employed by Oldham Council as welfare officer.” https://www.oldhamchronicle.co.uk/newsfeatures/139/mainnews/146571/ — LBC, “Rochdale grooming gang leader was employed by council as welfare officer, report reveals.” https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/rochdalegroominggangleadershabirahmedoldhamcouncilDWzFwQ_2/
3. 2005: GMP failed to inform Oldham Council of an allegation of serious sexual assault against Ahmed; 2008: Rochdale Borough Council and GMP did not inform Oldham Council when allegations were discussed in Rochdale. Oldham Chronicle (as note 2).
4. 2012: a young woman came forward alleging abuse by Ahmed; children’s social care closed the case within days without assessment. Oldham Council, full Council meeting minutes, 27 June 2022 (public questions on “Offender A”). https://committees.oldham.gov.uk/documents/s133936/Minutes%20005%2027th%20June%202022.pdf
5. “Sophie,” aged 12, reported being raped at Oldham police station in October 2006 and was told to return when she was “not drunk.” GB News, “Rochdale grooming gang ringleader ‘Daddy’ employed as welfare rights officer at Oldham Council, report reveals.”
   https://www.gbnews.com/news/rochdalegroominggangringleaderdaddyemployedaswelfarerightsofficeratoldhamcouncilreportreveals/321440
6. The 2022 independent review by Malcolm Newsam and Gary Ridgway found serious multiple failures by GMP and Oldham Council, and that both were “more concerned about covering up their failures” than acknowledging them. LBC (as note 2); GB News (as note 5).
7. Starmer calling the Jay/IICSA inquiry “comprehensive” and saying the issue “just needs action,” not more consultation (press conference, January 2025). The Telegraph, “All the times Starmer resisted a grooming gangs inquiry.” Quote independently reproduced in contemporaneous coverage, e.g. The Conservative Woman, 13 January 2025. https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/howdarestarmerrejectapublicinquiryintomuslimgroominggangs/
8. January 2025: Labour MPs whipped to vote down a proposed national inquiry (amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill); defeated 364 to 111. Business Standard, “UK lawmakers vote against new inquiry into ‘grooming gangs’ scandal,” 9 January 2025. https://www.businessstandard.com/worldnews/ukmpsvotenewinquirygroominggangscandalkeirstarmerlabourparty125010900111_1.html — opposition (“turning a blind eye to justice”) per The Telegraph, “All the times Starmer resisted a grooming gangs inquiry.”
9. 9 January 2025: the Prime Minister’s official spokesman rejected a national inquiry on the basis that victims “don’t want to see another national inquiry.” The Telegraph, “All the times Starmer resisted a grooming gangs inquiry” (Downing Street lobby briefing, on the public record).
10. 30 April 2025 (Prime Minister’s Questions): Starmer maintained that prosecutions, implementing the Jay recommendations, and local inquiries were a sufficient response. The Telegraph, “All the times Starmer resisted a grooming gangs inquiry” (Hansard, PMQs, 30 April 2025).
11. 14 June 2025: after Baroness Casey’s national audit, Starmer reversed and announced a full national statutory inquiry, having previously said one was unnecessary. Law Society Gazette, “Starmer orders statutory inquiry into grooming gangs.” https://www.lawsociety.ie/gazette/topstories/2025/june/starmerordersstatutoryinquiryintogroominggangs/ — see also “Grooming gangs scandal,” Wikipedia (with links to Reuters and BBC reports of the 14 June 2025 announcement). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grooming_gangs_scandal
12. Survivors resigned from the inquiry’s liaison panel; one (known as “Elizabeth”) described the process as feeling like a coverup and a “toxic environment.” SSS Learning, “Grooming Gangs Inquiry — A Toxic Environment?” https://ssslearning.co.uk/safeguardingarticles/groominggangsinquiry, on the troubled chair recruitment, see House of Commons Library briefing “The Independent Inquiry into Grooming Gangs” (referencing The Guardian, “Last candidate to chair grooming gangs inquiry withdraws over ‘lack of trust’”). https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP10613/CBP10613.pdf
13. The statutory Independent Inquiry into Grooming Gangs formally began on 13 April 2026, with Oldham among the first local areas selected for investigation; statutory inquiries under the Inquiries Act 2005 have power to compel witnesses to give evidence. Bevan Brittan, “National Inquiry into Grooming Gangs is Launched.” https://www.bevanbrittan.com/insights/articles/2026/nationalinquiryintogroominggangsislaunched/ — House of Commons Library, “The Independent Inquiry into Grooming Gangs.” https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/researchbriefings/cbp10613/
14. Ahmed, 73, released on licence in July 2026; stripped of British citizenship but not deportable owing to a pre1973 exemption in the Immigration Act 1971; subject to supervision, electronic tag, exclusion zone, lifetime sexoffenders registration, and a ban on contact with children (supervised until 10 June 2033). GB News (as note 1); Manchester Mirror (as note 1).
15. Ahmed’s British citizenship was revoked in 2016 to enable deportation on release. He claims to have renounced his Pakistani citizenship by destroying (“ripping up”) his Pakistani passport,  a claim disputed by UK authorities, who say he never completed the full formal process; Pakistan nonetheless refuses to accept him, maintaining its records show he is no longer a citizen, and UK officials reportedly regard Pakistan’s refusal as a greater obstacle to removal than the Immigration Act 1971 itself. GB News, “Rochdale grooming gang ringleader Shabir Ahmed ‘rips up his passport’ — and Pakistan refuses to take him back.” https://www.gbnews.com/news/rochdalegroominggangringleadershabirahmedpassportpakistan — LBC, “Ministers will leave ‘no stone unturned’ as government attempts to remove grooming gang leader Shabir Ahmed from UK.” https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/ministersattemptremovegroominggangleadershabirahmeduk5HjdcWR_2/