The family of alleged Bondi gunman, Naveed Akram, is living in “constant fear” after receiving death threats, a Sydney court has been told, as a legal bid seeks to keep their identities hidden from the public.
The 24-year-old defendant is facing 59 charges linked to the December 14 attack on a Jewish festival, an incident authorities have described as the deadliest terror attack in the country’s history.
Prosecutors allege he carried out the assault alongside his father, Sajid, who was killed at the scene.
During proceedings, Akram’s lawyer requested that identifying details of his mother, brother and sister—including their names, addresses and workplaces—be withheld from publication and removed from earlier media reports.
A magistrate previously issued an interim suppression order while considering the application, noting the intense global attention on the case but also acknowledging that the mother’s identity had already been widely reported.
Appearing at the Downing Centre Local Court, defence lawyer Richard Wilson said the public reaction to the attack had been intense but understandable.
“The outpouring of public grief, public outrage, and public anger” was justified, he said, but stressed that there was no evidence linking the accused’s immediate family to the crime.
He warned that continued publication of their personal details could expose them to vigilante retaliation. Statements submitted to the court described a pattern of harassment directed at the family, including verbal abuse shouted from passing vehicles and threats made late at night.
In her written testimony, Akram’s mother recounted multiple incidents, including a group of men knocking on her door before leaving prior to police arrival, and food items such as eggs and pork being thrown at the house. She also reported receiving threatening calls and messages, including one caller who asked, “Are you still alive?”
“We live in constant fear someone will harm us or set our house on fire. I fear for my life and the lives of my children,” she wrote.
Akram attended the hearing via video link from a high-security prison, remaining mostly silent except to confirm he could follow the proceedings.
Media organisations, including News Corp Australia, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and Guardian Australia, have opposed the suppression request. Their legal representatives argued that restricting publication would be ineffective given that the information is already in the public domain.
“The cat is well and truly out of the bag,” media lawyer Matthew Lewis told the court, adding that the reported threats against the family appeared to have lessened and that there was no clear evidence of immediate danger.
He further emphasized the importance of transparency, suggesting it plays a crucial role in helping the public process the scale and impact of the attack.
The court is expected to deliver its ruling on the suppression order on April 2.
