Key Takeaways:
- Sepehr Saryazdi, a 24-year-old CSIRO PhD candidate, has been denied bail after being charged with one count of acts in preparation for or planning a terrorist act.
- The alleged offense relates to plans to lead a riot on the Gold Coast on Australia Day, using Molotov cocktails, and encouraging others to do the same.
- Saryazdi had allegedly made online posts detailing his plans, including purchasing supplies and equipment for the attack.
- The court heard that Saryazdi had become isolated and influenced by new associates, leading to an interest in geopolitics and a desire to bring attention to the government.
- The magistrate denied bail, citing the significant risk of serious injury to multiple people and Saryazdi’s frank admissions about his beliefs.
Introduction to the Case
The Brisbane Magistrates Court recently heard a bail application for Sepehr Saryazdi, a 24-year-old CSIRO PhD candidate accused of planning to use Molotov cocktails in a terror attack on the Gold Coast on Australia Day. Saryazdi has been charged with one count of acts in preparation for or planning a terrorist act, and his case has raised concerns about the potential for violent extremism in the community. The court heard that Saryazdi had been brought to the attention of counter-terrorism officers after information was received about his online activities, including posts on Facebook messenger chats within a private group containing over 50 people.
The Alleged Offense
During the bail application, Commonwealth prosecutor Ellie McDonald outlined the alleged offense, stating that Saryazdi had plans to lead a riot on the Gold Coast on Australia Day and had purchased supplies and equipment for the attack. The court heard that Saryazdi had encouraged others to do the same, with posts allegedly stating, "I will be leading the Gold Coast riots on Jan 26 if you guys know people in Melbourne, let them know so they can start buying vodka bottles early to stockpile in batches." Saryazdi also allegedly told the group members that they "need to make the police doubt their own world views and convince them to quit their job." These posts, along with others, demonstrated a clear intention to engage in violent and extremist behavior.
The Defendant’s Background
Defence lawyer Hellen Shilton told the court that her client was an academic who had moved from Sydney to Brisbane for his career with the CSIRO but had become isolated. Saryazdi had developed an interest in geopolitics and started watching videos and protests, becoming "overwhelmed emotionally." According to Shilton, Saryazdi’s intention was to make "national news" and "bring people together" following his disenchantment with the government. However, the court heard that Saryazdi’s online posts and actions suggested a more sinister motivation, with a desire to replace the Australian government with a cybernetics government. The court also heard that Saryazdi had recommended that group members learn "how to shoot guns at shooting ranges" and apply for jobs with ASIO and the defence force, with the aim of "beginning internal operations to down tyranny."
The Bail Application
Ms McDonald opposed Saryazdi’s bail, arguing that he was a "significant risk of committing a violent act if released into the community." Given the state of his mind, she argued that there were no conditions that could alleviate the risk of him engaging in violent behavior. The court heard that Saryazdi had made frank admissions about his beliefs, including that the Australian Government was authoritarian and that he wanted to replace it with a cybernetics government. Magistrate Penelope Hay denied his bail, finding that the risk of serious injury to multiple people was too significant. Saryazdi was remanded in custody, and his case will return to court next month.
Conclusion and Implications
The case of Sepehr Saryazdi highlights the potential for violent extremism in the community and the importance of monitoring online activities. The alleged offense demonstrates the need for vigilance and cooperation between law enforcement agencies to prevent such attacks. The court’s decision to deny bail reflects the serious nature of the allegations and the potential risk to the community. As the case continues, it will be important to consider the factors that contributed to Saryazdi’s radicalization and to develop strategies to prevent similar cases in the future. The community must remain vigilant and report any suspicious activity to the authorities to prevent such attacks and ensure public safety. Additionally, the case raises questions about the role of social media in facilitating extremist ideologies and the need for social media companies to take responsibility for monitoring and removing such content. Ultimately, the case of Sepehr Saryazdi serves as a reminder of the ongoing threat of terrorism and the need for continued efforts to prevent and counter violent extremism.
