-
Publicly apologise,
-
Pay approximately £310,000 in damages and legal costs, and
-
Comply with an injunction prohibiting repetition of the defamatory claims.
This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of record.
So here is the challenge.
If you are telling the world you are a whistleblower under attack, then act like one.
Whistleblowers document. They don’t just broadcast.
1) What is verified — and what is not
Verified: UK court outcome (defamation)
Multiple mainstream outlets report that the UK High Court ordered Raja to pay damages and costs and to publish a court-mandated apology/summary for a defined period. While headlines vary slightly, the existence of the order, the injunction, and the monetary penalty are consistent across sources.
This establishes one hard fact:
A UK court found that at least some of Adil Raja’s serious allegations were not legally defensible.
That finding alone places a burden on Raja to raise his evidentiary standard—especially when continuing to level accusations against named individuals.
Verified: Pakistan sought extradition papers via the UK
Dawn reports that Pakistan’s interior minister formally submitted extradition papers for Shahzad Akbar and Adil Raja to the UK High Commissioner, citing alleged online anti-Pakistan propaganda.
This confirms that the dispute is no longer rhetorical—it has entered formal legal and diplomatic channels.
