Evidence cited by the court included:
-
Farooq’s own notes (2008) expressing fear that seeking a higher role could get him killed.
-
Confessional statements from convicted participants.
-
Testimony referencing Hussain’s insistence that no deputy could exist.
This wasn’t a spontaneous crime. It was presented as discipline by terror—an internal warning delivered with finality.
Intent, unpacked: four layers
1) Preserve absolute authority
Authoritarian movements survive on one rule: challenge equals extinction. Farooq’s credibility made him uniquely dangerous—not because he was plotting a coup, but because he could plausibly replace the leader.
2) Create deterrence
The location mattered. London—far from Karachi—signaled that distance offered no safety. The message was for cadres everywhere.
In this article:Accountability, Altaf Hussain, Dr Imran Farooq, Farooq Killing Intent Analysis, Karachi Politics, leadership cults, London assassination 2010, MQM, Pakistan anti-terrorism court, political violence, Rule of law
Social Hashtags:
Social Hashtags:
#Accountability,
#AltafHussain,
#DoomForMQM,
#EEAT,
#ImranFarooq,
#JusticeForImranFarooq,
#Karachi,
#KarachiCrime,
#LondonMurder,
#MQM,
#MQMPakistan,
#MustafaKamal,
#Pakistan,
#PakistanPolitics,
#PoliticalAssassination,
#PoliticalViolence,
#PoliticalViolenceInPakistan,
#RAW,
#RuleOfLaw,
#ScotlandYard,
#StateFailure,
#TOKReports,
#UKExile,
#عمران_فاروق_کا_قاتل_الطاف
if ( function_exists( 'pgntn_display_pagination' ) ) pgntn_display_pagination( 'multipage' );
