Why should Pakistan accept a British criminal?

[Master Chief]

Exactly.

As of now, there is nothing known for a fact, only speculation and wild conjectures.

Indeed, to wait and see seems prudent.

I disagree. Proactive statecraft is reliant on an ability to anticipate the manoeuvres of one's rivals (and friends alike!). Pre-emptive action should then be taken in anticipation of said manoeuvres. Pakistan would be foolish if a year down the line, her leaders found themselves confronted with some imposition of a foreign nation's will upon them with little option but to facilitate acceptance of said will.

Steps can be taken today by the Pakistani government to resist these irrational and imperialistic urges of the British.

 

[VCheng]

Pakistan would be foolish if a year down the line, her leaders found themselves confronted with some imposition of a foreign nation's will upon them with little option but to facilitate acceptance of said will.

ROFL.

And just how would passing a domestic law in London to be applied to a crime already punished retroactively impose on another sovereign nation?

Utterly ridiculous preposition.

 

[Master Chief]

ROFL.

And just how would passing a domestic law in London to be applied to a crime already punished retroactively impose on another sovereign nation?

Utterly ridiculous preposition.

Revoking this individual's Pakistani citizenship is a step we should urgently take pre-emptively, to thwart the ambitions of the British deep state.

Who is UK to lecture Pakistan?

Those of us based here have plenty of questions to ask of our own judicial system.

There is an opportunity here for Pakistan to tell these glorified Eurozone city states their jurisdiction no longer spreads as widely as they think it does.

 

[Musings]

Bro you forget - attempting to debate with someone that always knows better deeper and smarter than you- the argument becomes pointless.
We live in the UK and know exactly what they are trying and attempting but he knows better……

 

[Master Chief]

Bro you forget - attempting to debate with someone that always knows better deeper and smarter than you- the argument becomes pointless.
We live in the UK and know exactly what they are trying and attempting but he knows better……

Indeed!

But - as always - I post on a forum, not by direct messaging. Hence, these posts may be of benefit to 3rd parties who observe these machinations with uncertainty. Folks may take it or leave it as they see fit. Of course @VCheng has his own unique take on all earthly matters, likewise for 3rd parties to ruminate upon as they see fit.

 

[VCheng]

Revoking this individual's Pakistani citizenship is a step we should urgently take pre-emptively, to thwart the ambitions of the British deep state.

BWAHAHA!

Revoking a citizenship "pre-emptively"? How does that work? Revoking on the basis of that has not happened yet is a legal joke.

Even if it were somehow laughably attempted, what grounds are there for a crime committed in another jurisdiction for which the criminal has already been sentenced, and has even completed it to revoke a citizenship?

Go on, please explain that one to me, since I admit you know "better deeper and smarter" than me, of course. (Please see the footnote below.)

- attempting to debate with someone that always knows better deeper and smarter than you-

It is quite telling that consolation on the basis of commenting upon the poster rather than the actual substance of the argument made is the only thing on display here.

Let us reiterate the actual argument

How would passing a domestic law in London to be applied to a crime already punished retroactively impose on another sovereign nation?

This would a great opportunity to show "better deeper smarter" knowledge for all to see.

Folks may take it or leave it as they see fit.

Agreed.

Res ipsa loquitur indeed.

========================
FOOTNOTE
========================

None of these can be applied pre-emptively for the case under discussion, keeping in mind that setting such a precedent would have far reaching implications applicable to millions of other Pakistanis:

Grounds for Revocation of Pakistani Citizenship​

The revocation of Pakistani citizenship can occur under several circumstances. Below are the primary grounds for revocation:

1. Voluntary Renunciation​

• Individuals may choose to renounce their Pakistani citizenship voluntarily. This process typically involves surrendering all valid and expired Pakistani passports and national identification cards.

2. Failure to Meet Residency Requirements​

• Citizens who do not fulfill the required residency conditions may lose their citizenship status. This includes not residing in Pakistan for a specified duration.

3. Involvement in Harmful Activities​

• Engaging in activities that are considered detrimental to national security can lead to revocation. This includes actions that threaten the integrity or safety of the state.

4. Acquisition of Foreign Citizenship​

• Pakistani citizens may lose their citizenship if they acquire citizenship of another country without obtaining prior permission from the Pakistani government. This is particularly relevant in cases of dual citizenship.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Shabir Ahmed: Rochdale grooming gang leader 'could be deported'

A Home Office minister says they were examining changing the law to deport recently freed Shabir Ahmed.

www.bbc.co.uk

Why is Pakistan being forced and threatened of sanctions by growing voices from British politicians, far right activists and news outlets on taking a convicted serial r*pist and pedophile, Shabir Ahmed who has recently been released from prison. Ahmed came to the UK in 1970s and has spent most of his life in the UK. His crimes were committed in the UK and should face full force of the law. It is not Pakistans responsibility.

if his nationality is revoked and we are offered something in return then it will be great.
if some people wanted by Pakistan can be handed back then it will be good deal.
as for that criminal, if UK is willing to bear the costs of his stay in Pakistani prison just like its deal with some African countries regarding failed asylum seekers then we shoud give it a go.

 

[Master Chief]

. Involvement in Harmful Activities​

• Engaging in activities that are considered detrimental to national security can lead to revocation. This includes actions that threaten the integrity or safety of the state.

Mate, you've answered your own question.

A rapist covincted abroad and given an overly lenient sentence is harmful to the safety and integrity of the Pakistani state.

Revoke his citizenship. He's not Pakistan's problem.

 

[VCheng]

if his nationality is revoked and we are offered something in return then it will be great.
if some people wanted by Pakistan can be handed back then it will be good deal.
as for that criminal, if UK is willing to bear the costs of his stay in Pakistani prison just like its deal with some African countries regarding failed asylum seekers then we shoud give it a go.

Any of those may or may not be possible as an accommodation between two sovereign nations as a "swap deal" as best negotiated by each side, of course.

Domestic laws would have absolutely no role to play in such matters.

 

[Master Chief]

if his nationality is revoked and we are offered something in return then it will be great.
if some people wanted by Pakistan can be handed back then it will be good deal.
as for that criminal, if UK is willing to bear the costs of his stay in Pakistani prison just like its deal with some African countries regarding failed asylum seekers then we shoud give it a go.

Sir. He is a free man. He has served his sentence.

I suppose Pakistan could theoretically put him on "re-trial" and sentence him in Pakistan under the principle of Universal Jurisdiction.

 

[VCheng]

Mate, you've answered your own question.

A rapist covincted abroad and given an overly lenient sentence is harmful to the safety and integrity of the Pakistani state.

Revoke his citizenship. He's not Pakistan's problem.

Fair enough. Please let me know if that impacts the "integrity and safety" of the State to establish the grounds as you mention.

The sentence was given in another jurisdiction according its laws. How does one claim it was "overly lenient" by the standards of another juridiciton?

 

[Master Chief]

Any of those may or may not be possible as an accommodation between two sovereign nations as a "swap deal" as best negotiated by each side, of course.

Domestic laws would have absolutely no role to play in such matters.

1. You're evidently not a lawyer, as you seem to completely misunderstand the legal options available to Pakistan.

2. You are practically advocating on behalf of this individual and his right to exist freely, whether in UK or Pakistan, which is baffling. Why don't you take him in USA if you're that concerned for his human rights?

 

[VCheng]

1. You're evidently not a lawyer, as you seem to completely misunderstand the legal options available to Pakistan.

2. You are practically advocating on behalf of this individual and his right to exist freely, whether in UK or Pakistan, which is baffling. Why don't you take him in USA if you're that concerned for his human rights?

So basically you have nothing to offer as an actual counter-argument. Thank you, I think we need not say anything more.