The alleged Bondi gunman has lost his court bid to suppress the names and addresses of his mother, brother, and sister due to fears over their safety. Lawyers for Naveed Akram - who is facing 59 charges over December's attack on a Jewish festival on Bondi Beach that killed 15 people - argued that his family could be targeted by vigilantes and had already experienced abuse.
Last month, details of Akram's family were suppressed under an interim order but on Thursday, a Sydney court lifted it after several media outlets opposed the move. The case had attracted 'unprecedented' attention in Australia and globally, the judge ruled, and information about the family was already widely available online.
Judge Hugh Donnelly stated, 'This case has unprecedented public interest, outrage, anger, and grief,' emphasizing that the request for a suppression order lasting 40 years did not meet the exceptional circumstances threshold and would only apply within Australia, not affecting international media or social networks.
The judge remarked on the significant commentary concerning the case in international forums and noted that Akram's driver's license had been posted online, which was regrettable. He also mentioned that suppressing the mother's identity would likely have little effect, considering her public interview.
The court indicated that the names and workplaces of Akram's siblings were unlikely to be relevant to court proceedings. Akram, 24, appeared via video link from a high-security prison. Reports revealed that individuals had driven past his family home, shouting abuses and threats, while family members reported receiving alarming messages.
Akram's mother expressed her fears in a statement, highlighting the danger facing their family, as they live in constant fear of violence. Meanwhile, lawyers for media organizations opposing the suppression argued that details of the family were already public knowledge and there was no evidence supporting an imminent threat to them.
Last month, details of Akram's family were suppressed under an interim order but on Thursday, a Sydney court lifted it after several media outlets opposed the move. The case had attracted 'unprecedented' attention in Australia and globally, the judge ruled, and information about the family was already widely available online.
Judge Hugh Donnelly stated, 'This case has unprecedented public interest, outrage, anger, and grief,' emphasizing that the request for a suppression order lasting 40 years did not meet the exceptional circumstances threshold and would only apply within Australia, not affecting international media or social networks.
The judge remarked on the significant commentary concerning the case in international forums and noted that Akram's driver's license had been posted online, which was regrettable. He also mentioned that suppressing the mother's identity would likely have little effect, considering her public interview.
The court indicated that the names and workplaces of Akram's siblings were unlikely to be relevant to court proceedings. Akram, 24, appeared via video link from a high-security prison. Reports revealed that individuals had driven past his family home, shouting abuses and threats, while family members reported receiving alarming messages.
Akram's mother expressed her fears in a statement, highlighting the danger facing their family, as they live in constant fear of violence. Meanwhile, lawyers for media organizations opposing the suppression argued that details of the family were already public knowledge and there was no evidence supporting an imminent threat to them.
