Key Takeaways:
- The alleged Bondi attack shooters, Sajid and Naveed Akram, did not receive training or come into contact with a broader terror cell while visiting the Philippines.
- The Australian federal police believe the terror attack was inspired by Islamic State, but the gunmen were not directed by any broader network.
- The Akrams acted alone, with no evidence to suggest they were part of a broader terrorist cell or were directed by others to carry out the attack.
- The Australian government has rejected calls for a federal royal commission into the Bondi massacre and antisemitism in Australia, despite growing demands from families of the shooting victims, Jewish community leaders, and the Coalition opposition.
Introduction to the Incident
The alleged Bondi attack shooters, Sajid and Naveed Akram, did not receive training or come into contact with a broader terror cell while visiting the Philippines, according to current assessments by federal police. The police assessment came as the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, continued to reject calls for a federal royal commission into the Bondi massacre and antisemitism in Australia. The Australian federal police commissioner, Krissy Barrett, stated that the alleged gunmen spent nearly a month in the Philippines just weeks before carrying out the antisemitic shooting at a Bondi Hanukah event on 14 December, killing 15 victims.
Investigation and Assessment
Barrett said police would not yet provide all details of their assessment as investigations continued, but while she said the AFP alleged the terror attack was inspired by Islamic State, the AFP did not believe the gunmen were directed by any broader network. The initial assessment from the Philippine national police was that the individuals rarely left their hotel, and there was no evidence to suggest they received training or underwent logistical preparation for their alleged attack. However, Barrett added that she was not suggesting that they were there for tourism. CCTV footage capturing the pair’s stay in the Philippines has been provided to the AFP, which suggests that the individuals acted alone.
Alleged Attackers’ Travel History
Sajid Akram was shot dead during the attack, and his son, Naveed, has been charged with dozens of offenses, including 15 counts of murder. Barrett said police had found that the Akrams departed Sydney for the Philippines on 1 November, visiting Davao City and returning to Australia on 29 November – just a fortnight before the 14 December attack. Investigators were still analyzing evidence, she said. The travel history of the alleged attackers has raised questions about their motivations and potential connections to terrorist organizations.
Government Response
Speaking alongside Barrett at the Canberra press conference, Albanese thanked the Philippines president, Ferdinand Marcos Jr, for assisting in the investigation. Albanese said the federal government and agencies would provide all assistance and information requested by the New South Wales government, in responding to the attack and for the state’s planned royal commission. However, Albanese maintained a federal royal commission was not needed, despite mounting pressure for such an inquiry, saying Dennis Richardson’s review of the national intelligence and policing systems was a better option. The government’s response has been criticized by some, who argue that a federal royal commission is necessary to fully investigate the incident and prevent similar attacks in the future.
Calls for a Royal Commission
An open letter from families of 11 Bondi victims calling for a royal commission was rebuffed by the government on Monday, with the home affairs minister, Tony Burke, claiming such an inquiry would "provide a public platform for some of the worst statements and worst voices". The shadow home affairs minister, James Paterson, on Tuesday claimed it was a "patronising" response from the government. Albanese said he recognised "many of the calls for a royal commission come from a good place", but stood by his decision. He again accused critics of seeking to politicise the terror shooting, noting that key dates in the timeline of the Akrams – including Sajid’s migration to Australia, the decision to grant him a gun licence, and an Asio investigation into Naveed – had occurred under Coalition federal governments.
Conclusion and Next Steps
The investigation into the Bondi attack is ongoing, and the Australian government has faced criticism for its response to the incident. The rejection of calls for a federal royal commission has been met with disappointment from families of the victims and Jewish community leaders. As the investigation continues, it is essential to consider the potential implications of the attack and the need for a thorough and independent inquiry to prevent similar incidents in the future. The government’s decision to rely on Dennis Richardson’s review of the national intelligence and policing systems may not be sufficient to address the concerns of the community, and a more comprehensive inquiry may be necessary to provide closure and justice for the victims and their families.
