The story seems almost unbelievable at first glance: a nuclear-armed state approaching a Western democracy with an informal proposal to swap convicted sex offenders for political dissidents. But according to a detailed investigation published by DropSite News, this is precisely what transpired during a quiet, closed-door meeting between Pakistan’s Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi and the UK’s High Commissioner Jane Marriott in Islamabad.
At the heart of the discussion was a startling bargain. Pakistan—after years of refusing to accept convicted members of the Rochdale grooming gang—signalled its willingness to take them back. In exchange, it demanded the extradition of two of its most outspoken critics living in the UK: former federal minister and barrister Shehzad Akbar, and myself, a journalist and retired army officer.
The message was unmistakable. The Pakistan government is prepared to treat dissidents as commodities in a geopolitical transaction, placing them on the same moral and legal level as convicted child abusers. This is not diplomacy. This is transnational repression at its most brazen.
The UK’s Dilemma: A Political Headache Meets an Authoritarian Opportunity
The British government has long been entangled in the political fallout of the Rochdale grooming gang. Several perpetrators—including Qari Abdul Rauf and Adil Khan—were stripped of their citizenship in 2018. Yet deportation stalled because Pakistan refused to recognise them as nationals once they voluntarily renounced their citizenship.
This legal limbo has fuelled years of anger in the British public sphere. Right-wing activists such as Tommy Robinson capitalised on the issue to accuse successive governments of weakness and double standards. Tech billionaire Elon Musk amplified these narratives globally, tweeting repeatedly in support of Robinson’s anti-government crusades.
For the current UK administration, the ability to finally deport these offenders would be seen as a major domestic victory.
Pakistan’s military-backed government, well aware of this political pressure, is now exploiting it to silence critics abroad.
Why Pakistan Wants Dissidents — And Why Now
In recent years, Pakistan has experienced an unprecedented breakdown of democratic norms. Journalists have been abducted, political opponents imprisoned, civilians tried in military courts, and constitutional amendments manipulated to entrench the power of Field Marshal Asim Munir, now elevated to the new position of Chief of Defence Forces with lifetime immunity.
Meanwhile, the incarceration of former Prime Minister Imran Khan has left the political system paralysed. With dissent at home increasingly dangerous, the last remaining space for free political expression has become the Pakistani diaspora—particularly those with platforms outside the military’s censorship.
This includes journalists like myself and human-rights advocates like Shehzad Akbar, whose reporting on corruption, constitutional violations, enforced disappearances, and extrajudicial abuses has placed us in direct confrontation with the state.
To silence these voices, Pakistan has escalated from domestic repression to transnational targeting, deploying legal, diplomatic, and coercive instruments far beyond its borders.
A Pattern of Persecution: From Passport Cancellation to SLAPP Lawsuits
To understand the gravity of this latest extradition attempt, one must view it in context. Over the past few years, the Pakistani state has taken an escalating series of actions against me:
- Cancellation of my national ID and passport, rendering me effectively stateless.
- Seizure of my assets and bank accounts in Pakistan.
- A court-martial in absentia, sentencing me to 14 years without legal representation or due process.
- The abduction of my mother, who remains under surveillance and barred from leaving Pakistan.
- A counterterrorism case brought against me in the UK, which concluded with No Further Action.
- A Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) in the High Court of London, designed to intimidate, discredit, and financially exhaust me.
These are the textbook tactics of transnational authoritarianism: coercion, intimidation, legal manipulation, and targeting of family members. Such methods have been widely condemned by the UN Special Rapporteurs on Torture, Human Rights Defenders, and Freedom of Expression. The grooming-gang swap proposal is simply the next step — the most shocking because it openly consolidates what has long been unofficial: Pakistan’s willingness to weaponise diplomacy to silence dissidents.
The Legal Barrier: UK Protections Against Politically Motivated Extradition
Despite the sensational nature of the proposed exchange, legal experts note that the UK cannot extradite political dissidents to regimes where they face persecution, torture, or unfair trial.
Under British law and international treaties:
- Political motivation invalidates extradition requests.
- Individuals cannot be returned to states where they face torture or cruel treatment (Article 3, Convention Against Torture).
- Extradition is barred if the requesting state lacks independent courts and due process (UK Extradition Act).
- Freedom of expression is explicitly protected under the European Convention on Human Rights, including criticism of foreign governments.
Pakistan fails every one of these tests.
The country is repeatedly ranked among the world’s most dangerous states for journalists, with dozens killed, hundreds abducted, and thousands forced into exile over the past decade. Torture in custody is well-documented, and political trials lack even minimal transparency.
Any extradition from the UK under such conditions is legally and morally indefensible.
A Grim Precedent for the Global Crackdown on Dissent
Beyond the personal stakes for those involved, this episode represents a disturbing precedent. If authoritarian states begin offering Western governments “political wins” in exchange for dissidents, the global environment for journalists, whistle-blowers, and human-rights defenders becomes exponentially more dangerous.
It would signal that:
- Exiled critics can be traded like diplomatic tokens.
- Repressive regimes can exploit Western domestic politics to advance their agendas.
- Safety abroad is conditional, precarious, and negotiable.
Such a precedent threatens the very concept of political asylum and undermines the international system built to prevent persecution across borders.
My Response—and a Call for International Attention
In response to the report, I have made it clear that I have committed no crime under UK law. My only “offence” is the practice of free journalism, exposing state overreach and human-rights violations.
If criticising a government is “anti-state propaganda,” then every journalist becomes a criminal. If speaking truth is punishable, then the state ceases to be democratic.
The international community must recognise that my case is not isolated. It is part of a broad strategy by Pakistan’s military establishment to suppress dissent everywhere—even beyond its borders.
With Pakistan now resorting to bartering criminals for critics, the urgency for international scrutiny cannot be overstated.
A Test for Both Governments
For Pakistan, this episode reveals the extent of institutional decay and democratic erosion under military dominance. For the UK, it is a test of principle: will the government uphold its commitments to human rights and free expression, or succumb to political pressure? The choice will define the safety of dissidents and journalists on British soil for years to come.
Adil Raja is a retired major of the Pakistan Army, freelance investigative journalist, and dissident based in London, United Kingdom. He is the host of “Soldier Speaks Reloaded,” an independent commentary platform focused on South Asian politics and security affairs. Adil is also a member of the National Union of Journalists (UK) and the International Human Rights Foundation. Read more about Adil Raja.. Read more about Adil Raja.
