Could Bondi Beach shooting have been prevented? ASIO warnings, missed signals and unanswered questions

Police inspect at the scene of a shooting at Bondi Beach in Sydney on December 15, 2025. (Photo by DAVID GRAY / AFP)

Australia is grappling with painful questions after the Bondi Beach shooting, the country’s deadliest mass attack in decades. As investigators piece together what went wrong, attention has shifted to whether warning signs were missed and whether authorities could have acted earlier to prevent the killings.

The attack took place on Sunday as members of Sydney’s Jewish community gathered to celebrate Hanukkah. A father and son opened fire on the crowd, killing more than a dozen people. Among the victims were a 10-year-old girl, a Holocaust survivor, and two rabbis.

The gunmen were identified as 50-year-old Sajid Akram and his 24-year-old son Naveed Akram. Sajid was shot dead during an exchange of fire with police. Naveed was arrested and remains under guard in hospital.

One of the most serious questions facing Australia’s security agencies is whether Naveed Akram should have been considered a higher risk.

The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation confirmed that one of the attackers was known to the agency. ASIO Director General Mike Burgess told ABC, “One of these individuals was known to us, but not in an immediate-threat perspective, so we need to look into what happened here.”

According to a senior Joint Counter Terrorism Team official, authorities began monitoring Naveed around six years ago after police uncovered a Sydney based Islamic State cell. That cell was led by Isaac El Matari, who was arrested in 2019 and later convicted of preparing an Islamic State insurgency in Australia.

ABC reported that Naveed had close links to Matari and other members of the cell, several of whom have since been convicted of terrorism offences. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese confirmed that ASIO investigated Naveed in 2019 for about six months but concluded he did not pose an ongoing threat.

This assessment appears to conflict with comments from New South Wales Police Commissioner Mal Lanyon, who said authorities had “little knowledge of either of these men” prior to the attack.

Experts say such discrepancies reflect the complexity of intelligence work. Greg Barton, a counterterrorism expert at Deakin University, told The Age, “If [Naveed Akram] was of interest in 2019, people will be asking whether the authorities missed something … People will be asking whether enough was done to monitor him. The authorities themselves will be asking that.”

Barton added, “Just because you find someone with links and connections doesn’t mean you have the basis for charging or arresting them.”

Eyewitnesses have also raised concerns about the speed and scale of the police response.

“Twenty minutes [later], there were four policemen. Nobody returned fire. Nothing. Like they froze. I don’t understand why,” Shmulik Scuri told the New Zealand Herald.

Grace Matthews, who took shelter nearby, told ABC that police appeared “very underprepared”. “There’s a police station less than a block from where the shooting was happening… It’s beyond my understanding as to why it took so long to handle,” she said.

Police have rejected claims that they had prior warnings about the event. Israeli security sources have suggested Mossad warned Australia about threats to Jewish targets, but NSW Police Commissioner Mal Lanyon said no specific intelligence was received.

“If the police had had intelligence that there was a risk to the community or to this event, we would’ve taken significant action,” Lanyon said.

The attack has also intensified scrutiny of Australia’s response to rising antisemitism.

Prime Minister Albanese described the shooting as “an act of evil” and said, “There is no place for this hate, violence and terrorism in our nation. Let me be clear, we will eradicate it.”

Data from the Executive Council of Australian Jewry shows 1,654 reported antisemitic incidents up to October 1, 2025. While lower than in 2024, the figure remains far higher than pre-2023 levels.

“The writing was on the wall,” Alex Ryvchin, Executive Officer of the council, told CNN. “This sort of thing was always bound to happen. But at the same time, we’re not a country with a high level of gun crime… This sort of thing just doesn’t happen here.”

ASIO itself had flagged the trend earlier this year. At the Annual Threat Assessment 2025, Burgess said, “Jewish Australians were increasingly conflated with the state of Israel, leading to an increase in anti-Semitic incidents.”

“Narratives originally centred on ‘freeing Palestine’ expanded to include incitements to ‘kill the Jews’,” he warned, adding, “I am concerned these attacks have not yet plateaued.”

Albanese appointed Jillian Segal as Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism, and her plan called for stronger definitions, education reforms and institutional safeguards.

“What once seemed distant or uncomfortable can no longer be ignored,” Segal said. “Australia responded decisively after Port Arthur in 1996. This moment requires the same action. Words are no longer enough.”

The plan has faced criticism over free speech concerns. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has gone further, accusing Albanese of “pouring fuel on the anti-Semitic fire”.

Albanese has pushed back. “Yes, we have taken it seriously, and we’ve continued to act,” he told CNN.

As investigations continue, Australia is left confronting an uncomfortable reality. While no intelligence system can guarantee prevention, the Bondi Beach attack has exposed gaps, contradictions and warning signs that will now be examined in painful detail.