Rupert Lowe, a British politician who has served as a member of Parliament for Great Yarmouth since 2024 and the leader of Restore Britain, has released "The Rape Gang Inquiry Report," an independent, survivor-led report into Britain’s rape gang scandal.
The 219-page report finds that at least 250,000 girls in the UK were groomed and raped largely by Muslim Pakistani men.
The report reveals that organized child rape gangs operated across at least 149 local authority districts while police, social services, schools, health services, and politicians failed to protect vulnerable girls, allowing them to be subjected to crimes such as repeated rape, gang rape, trafficking, torture, pregnancy, and forced conversions to Islam.
According to the report, rape gangs have exploited children systematically across every region of the United Kingdom for decades.
Some of the findings of the report include:
- A baby was abused and had cigarettes stubbed out on it while the mother was forced to watch; the baby was then murdered.
- Girls were sent to “red rooms” to be tortured, some of them murdered, some of it livestreamed.
- One girl was raped by a dog while men bet on whether it would vaginally or anally rape her.
- Girls were forced to have abortions with knitting needles. Glass bottles, keys, baseball bats, and other objects were forced inside them, some shattering.
- Girls were drugged, beaten, burned with cigarettes, locked in rooms, and passed between men. Some girls were set on fire.
- Girls were gang-raped by dozens of men at a time in “party houses.” They were whipped, hung upside down, suffocated, and urinated on. Girls as young as 5 or 6 were tied up and abused. Some girls were locked in dog cages.
- Girls were branded with an “M” for Muhammad. They were threatened with being killed and fed to pigs. They were mocked for wearing a crucifix during the rapes.
According to "The Rape Gang Inquiry Report," perpetrators followed consistent tactics of befriending vulnerable girls as young as 11 with gifts, drugs, and alcohol before subjecting them to crimes such as repeated sexual violence, severe physical assaults, and sustained torture.
The overwhelming majority of the rape gang networks consisted entirely of men from Muslim backgrounds – predominantly of Pakistani heritage, although smaller groups from Somali, Iranian, Syrian, Turkish, and other Muslim origins were also involved.
The 2014 Jay report also stated that “the majority of known perpetrators were of Pakistani heritage." Most of the convicted grooming gangs have been composed of Muslim men of Pakistani background.
According to the 2026 report, the demographic and cultural drivers are clear. Perpetrators from Pakistani Muslim and other Muslim backgrounds operated under an honor-and-shame-based clan code that treated non-Muslim girls, especially white working-class girls, as property available for sexual use.
The victims were taken to houses, flats, restaurants, and hotels where they were raped repeatedly by groups of men, tortured, filmed for blackmail, and told they were “white trash” or “kuffar” (infidels) who merited punishment. Many became pregnant while still children. Some miscarried under trauma, others endured coerced abortions, and some gave birth to children who were later removed by the state.
Survivors described daily rapes, “red rooms” of extreme torture, trafficking between cities, and institutional disbelief that compounded their suffering. Some girls were even trafficked to the Middle East, where they would endure Islamic marriage.
UK institutions — including police, social services, schools, NHS, and politicians — failed victims through denial, ignored reports, criminalization of victims, destruction of evidence, and prioritization of political correctness and fears of “racism” accusations over child protection.
The report notes that the NHS, including its mental health teams, sexual health clinics, hospitals, GPs, and emergency departments, repeatedly failed to safeguard children who presented with clear physical injuries, repeated STIs, suicide attempts, self-harm, and disclosures of rape. Staff recorded the evidence, treated the 205 symptoms, and discharged the children back into the hands of their abusers without triggering safeguarding, making referrals, or providing trauma care. This was not an occasional oversight. It was a consistent practice across multiple regions and services.
Hospitals recorded physical injuries consistent with sexual assault yet took no protective action and sent the children home the same night.
The report reveals that some of the raped girls were handed back to their abusers by the police.
Scholars and specialists on Islam emphasize the religious motivations of the perpetrators. Dan Burmawi, the founder and CEO of the Ideological Defense Institute (IDI), wrote on X:
For Muslim men to rape British girls on this scale is not a sexual crime; it’s a political one. Because Islam treats non-Muslim girls as property that Muslims may seize, the grooming and the rapes were carrying out the agenda of a political ideology that calls itself a religion. This was an act of war, not a sex crime.
In November 2025, the Australian academic and specialist in Islam, Dr. Mark Durie, published a report titled "UK grooming gangs and Islam," in which he demonstrates that there is a direct link between Islamic theology and the grooming and rape gangs operating in Britain.
Durie argues that the race of the grooming and rape gangs, and particularly their inaccurate description as "Asian," has concealed the role of Islam in both the perpetration of these crimes and their cover-up by the Muslim diaspora in Britain.
Durie identifies eight aspects of Islamic law and theology that influence and enable the criminality of the Muslim grooming and rape gangs.
These eight ideals are the doctrine of the superiority of Muslims over non-Muslims, the doctrine of loyalty and disavowal, also known as ‘love and hate for the sake of God’, the superiority and dominance of men over women, the mandated seclusion of women by men, the religious practice of forced marriage, and the lack of a concept of an age of consent, the perceived threat of dangerous female sexuality, the practice of sex slavery as an aspect of the laws of jihad, dhimmitude and the treatment of conquered non-Muslim peoples in Islamic law.
Durie highlights Islam's teachings on sexual slavery and jihad:
The Islamic rules of war are detailed, regulating diverse aspects of armed conflict. Some of these rules concern the institution of slavery. In Islamic law, slavery is a by-product of war against infidels. The sharia considers non-Muslim captives to be enslaved by virtue of their capture. They can be distributed to Muslim fighters as part of the spoils of war. Captives may be sold, exchanged for a ransom or kept as slaves. During Muhammad’s lifetime, Muslim armies captured and enslaved women from among their enemies at more than a dozen battles.
In Islamic law, having sex with a female captive-slave is not zinā [adultery]: it is authorized repeatedly by the Quran (e.g. Sura 4:24, 23:6, 70:30), with many precedents in the hadiths. Furthermore, according to Muhammad a married infidel woman who is taken captive in war is automatically divorced by the fact of being taken captive. This means that if a slave master has sex with a (previously) married female captive, this is not adultery.
It may seem incongruous that the concept of slavery might be linked to the rape of white girls in the UK in the twenty-first century, adds Durie. Yet, Islamic enslavement and sexual exploitation of white women have a long history. It has been estimated that from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century, around one million Europeans were captured for the Barbary slave trade. In March 1786, when Thomas Jefferson and John Adams asked Tripoli’s ambassador to France why the Barbary states were making war on other nations not hostile to them, Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman reportedly replied:
It was written in their Koran that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman [Muslim] who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share…
It is striking that the medieval Arabic word for the Slavs, saqāliba, came to be used by Muslims to refer to European slaves in general. This is also the origin of the English word “slave.” Furthermore, the term “Caucasian” referring to the white “race” was coined by the German Johann Blumenbach, almost certainly under the influence of the Muslim preference for slaves from the Caucasus, especially Circassian women, who were highly prized for the harem, being considered the most beautiful of women.
While it is no doubt the case that many Muslims reject Islam’s traditional teachings about jihad warfare and its by-product of slavery, many are aware of Islam’s traditional concept of lawful sex with slaves. There are rulings readily available on the internet that condone Islamic sex slavery. See, for example, Islam Q&A’s fatwa on “What is the ruling on intimacy with slave women?” which is reported to have had over 360,000 views.
Some Muslim men, who are by no means experts in Islam, may attempt to justify their abuse of grooming gang victims by framing it in terms of an Islamically legitimate master-slave relationship. In Oxford, a perpetrator named Muhammad branded his victim with the letter M to show she was his property. Survivors report being forced to cook and clean for their captors like domestic slaves, in addition to being sexually abused.
Durie also explains the concept of dhimmitude and Islam’s treatment of conquered non-Muslim peoples.
He notes that the classical Islamic rules for jihad, understood in Islamic law as warfare against non-Muslims to advance the power of Islam, were established in the medieval period. These laws divided the world into two regions: the house of Islam, where Islam ruled, and the house of war, where non-Muslims ruled. Non-Muslims were thus divided by Islamic law into two groups: those who lived under Islamic rule and were not legitimate objects of war, provided that they met certain conditions; and those who did not live under Islamic rule and were legitimate objects of war. This second group could be fought against and captured as slaves:
In Islamic law, conquered non-Muslims communities are considered to be tolerated under a pact of surrender, known as a dhimma. This pact permits non-Muslims living under Islamic rule – known as dhimmis – to keep their religion, provided that the men pay an annual financial penalty, known as jizya, and the dhimmi community abides by various laws that, as the great commentator Ibn Kathir put it, “ensured their continued humiliation, degradation and disgrace”. The dhimma covenant is described in Islamic legal texts as an alternative to continued warfare, in accordance with the doctrine of three choices that Muhammad instructed his followers to offer non-Muslims. These three choices were conversion to Islam, surrender under the terms of a dhimma pact, or the sword.
When a dhimmi community is considered to have broken their pact, by either not paying the tribute or not abiding by the rules of the dhimma, the jihad could be restarted, and the sharia laws of war would apply. This means death for the men, enslavement of the women and children, and looting of non-Muslims’ property…
The annual payment of the jizya tribute and satisfaction of other dhimma conditions signified for dhimmi men their annual escape from death. For dhimmi women, it signified their protection from enslavement and future rape. So the threat of jihad rape lurks in the background of dhimmi– Muslim gender relations. Non-Muslims living under sharia conditions face the constant threat of lawful rape, killing, and looting.
The legal framework of the dhimma imposed perpetual insecurity upon Christian communities living under Muslim rule. It has provided a religiously informed cultural frame for the continued kidnapping, forced conversion, and marriage of non-Muslim girls in Egypt and Pakistan. This applies alongside and in addition to the legal vulnerability of non-Muslims, whose testimony in a sharia court cannot stand against that of a Muslim; this generates a culture of the discounting of non-Muslims’ versions of events. It also applies alongside the other factors listed here, such as the guardianship system, which wrests ‘converted’ girls out of the care and protection of their non-Muslim parents. The dhimma system offers a moral plausibility frame in which the compounded theological and legal factors can work together to legitimise sexual abuse of non-Muslims.
One of the impacts of the dhimmi condition is to inculcate fear in non-Muslim communities. Over centuries of threatened and realised abuse, they can be rendered servile and submissive. One interpretation of the complicity of the authorities in the UK grooming gang crisis is that a kind of dhimmi servility has settled into the souls of UK authorities. This respects Islam and Muslims at all costs, while disbelieving and inculpating non-believers. Seen in this light, the authorities’ inaction in response to the grooming gang crisis could be considered a milestone in the ongoing Islamisation of the UK.
The pattern of sexual violence against non-Muslim minorities in Muslim-majority contexts also needs to be taken into account.
There appear to be parallels between the way Pakistani Muslim men treat non-Muslim girls and women in Pakistan and how they treat non-Muslim girls and women in the UK. There are credible reports from Pakistan of sex crimes committed by Muslim men against non-Muslim girls and women.
This was on the mind of the Network of Sikh Organizations UK when they wrote to the Home Secretary in January 2025 to protest the way the authorities have been characterizing the UK grooming gang perpetrators as “Asian.” They pointed out that Sikh and Hindu girls have been targeted by Muslim grooming gangs, and implored the Home Secretary to attend to religious drivers in addition to cultural influences, drawing his attention to the “appalling treatment” of non-Muslim girls in Pakistan.
In April 2024, the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights issued a press release entitled “Pakistan: UN experts alarmed by lack of protection for minority girls from forced religious conversions and forced marriage.” It stated that “Christian and Hindu girls remain particularly vulnerable to forced religious conversion, abduction, trafficking, child, early and forced marriage, domestic servitude and sexual violence."
In 2021, the BBC reported that as many as 1,000 non-Muslim girls – Christians, Hindus, and Sikhs – are abducted each year in Pakistan and forced to convert and marry their abductors.
According to Islamic law, if a woman makes an accusation of rape and cannot provide the required four male witnesses, she can be treated as having confessed to the crime of zinā (adultery).
In 2003, the National Commission on the Status of Women in Pakistan reported that as many as 88% of women jailed in Pakistan are victims of rape or gang rape who were unable to provide the required evidence of four male witnesses and were consequently convicted of self-confessed illicit sex.
It appears that some migrants from Pakistan to the UK have brought with them an expectation of impunity for rape, enabled by Islamic teachings.
The Rape Gang Inquiry Report's recommendations include improved data recording on ethnoreligious patterns among offenders, far stronger sentencing, a comprehensive deportation effort, institutional accountability measures, multi-agency coordination, specialist training, enhanced safeguarding through greater family involvement, and closing the various gaps in British law through which so many victims fell.
The report highlights the significance of deportations, denaturalization, and stricter border control to help protect British children from rape gangs. It adds that:
Every foreign national convicted of group-based CSE must at the very least be deported.
Any British citizen convicted of these offences who holds dual nationality must lose their citizenship automatically upon conviction, rendering them liable for deportation. This ought to apply retrospectively to those convicted in the past, too. The Home Office must publish annual deportation figures, broken down by national background and offence type.
Where a perpetrator has family members in Britain who have supported, harbored or failed to report the offending, the entire immediate family unit must also face deportation proceedings themselves, unless they can prove either active cooperation with authorities or no prior knowledge.
The evidence from witnesses, convictions, and the Casey Audit shows a clear overrepresentation of Muslim men, particularly of Pakistani heritage, in these organized networks. The Inquiry has not ignored this. Mosques, madrassas, and community organizations that have harbored or failed to report perpetrators must face investigation and, if found guilty, be closed. The immediate deportation of anyone nested within such sub-cultures promoting attitudes that dehumanize non-Muslim girls must be pursued.
The nations of the world are not identical. Ultra-selective border control, attentive to general patterns in sending countries, is therefore also vital to the long-run happiness and continued existence of host peoples across the West. Immigration policy must immediately reflect the evidence. Anyone from a country whose nationals are disproportionately represented in rape gang convictions must no longer be entitled to a visa. This should be applied ruthlessly. Our young girls must come first.
Editor's Note: Do you enjoy PJ Media's conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join PJ Media VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member