Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What are the latest statistics on sex offences committed by foreign nationals in the UK?
Executive summary
Recent reporting and FOI-based analyses show foreign nationals are disproportionately represented in some UK sexual‑offence statistics: Centre for Migration Control/press reporting says foreign nationals accounted for roughly 25–26% of sexual‑offence arrests or convictions in various 2024–2025 snapshots, despite migrants making up about 9–11% of the population (examples: 26% of sexual assault convictions on women; 3.5× higher arrest rate for sexual offences versus Britons) [1] [2] [3]. Official statistical caveats and disputed interpretations accompany these figures: the ONS and police data collection methods, “unknown” nationalities, population denominators and differences between arrests, prosecutions and convictions limit direct conclusions about relative offending rates [4] [5] [6].
1. What the headline numbers being cited actually are
Several media and FOI‑driven analyses circulated in 2024–25. The Centre for Migration Control and outlets citing its work report foreign nationals made up around 26% of arrests for sexual offences in the first 10 months of one year and that foreign suspects were 3.5 times more likely to be arrested for sex offences than British suspects (rates cited: ~165 per 100,000 migrant population v. 48 per 100,000 for Britons) [3] [1]. Other FOI‑based reporting and MoJ data show foreign nationals made up about a quarter of sexual‑assault convictions against women in a recent year (26%) and between 15–23% of sexual offence convictions depending on whether “unknown” nationalities are allocated [2] [7] [8].
2. Arrests ≠ convictions ≠ prevalence — official data limitations
Journalistic and official sources stress important differences: arrests do not equal charges or convictions, and police nationality data are often self‑reported “primary” nationality or recorded nationality rather than legal citizenship. The ONS bulletin and analysts warn sample sizes, changing question wording and reduced samples can affect sexual‑victimisation and criminal justice statistics; the Met and other forces’ FOI returns can show who was proceeded against but not necessarily guilty outcomes [4] [5] [6]. Several reports note many records list nationality as “unknown,” which changes percentage shares depending on how those are handled [7] [8].
3. How population denominators and timing can skew rate comparisons
Analysts cautioned that comparing small nationality subgroups to the much larger British population can dramatically amplify rate ratios. For example, claims that Afghans or Eritreans are “20×” more likely to be convicted have been challenged because the population denominators used (sometimes 2021 census-based counts) likely undercount recent arrivals, exaggerating per‑capita rates [5] [6]. Sky News’ fact check likewise adjusted extreme claims — finding Afghans were closer to three times, not 22 times, as likely to be convicted — while noting data limitations [5].
4. Variation by offence type and geography
Reporting shows differences by offence subtype (rape, sexual assault, grooming) and by area: some pieces highlight that foreign nationals accounted for a larger share of specific offence categories (e.g., rape of females over 16) or in certain forces, while London‑specific claims (for example, “40% of sexual assaults in London by people born overseas”) have been queried and could depend on how “born overseas” is defined and which years are included [7] [5] [6] [9]. Available sources do not provide a complete national breakdown by every sub‑offence and every nationality in standardized format.
5. Political and policy responses shaping the narrative
Reporting shows these statistics have been used in political debate and have prompted policy proposals: the government moved to deny refugee status to foreign nationals with convictions that qualify them for the sex offender register, and politicians have cited the FOI figures to argue for stricter immigration measures [10] [11]. Journalistic pieces and fact‑checks note political actors sometimes used raw FOI counts or selective denominators to make broader claims about migrants and crime [6] [5].
6. How to read these figures responsibly
The strongest conclusions supported by the available reporting are twofold: foreign nationals appear in a disproportionate share of certain sexual‑offence arrests and convictions in recent FOI snapshots; and substantial methodological caveats — arrests vs convictions, “unknown” nationalities, self‑reported nationality, census‑based denominators that may be outdated, and small sample sizes for some nationalities — weaken claims about absolute comparative offending propensities [3] [2] [4] [5] [7]. Where sources explicitly refute an overblown claim (for example, extreme multipliers like 22×), that refutation is documented in fact‑checks [5].
If you want a follow‑up, I can: (a) list the specific FOI reports and force‑by‑force counts cited in the Centre for Migration Control’s analysis; (b) extract the MoJ FOI tables referenced in the press pieces; or (c) map how “unknown” nationality entries change percentage shares — using only the sources you provided.