Appearing before a royal commission investigating Australia’s deadliest mass shooting in decades, Australian Security Intelligence Organisation chief Mike Burgess said the agency had been “stretched” by competing security challenges, including religious extremism, politically motivated violence and the growing radicalization of young people online.

The inquiry is examining the circumstances surrounding the December attack at Bondi Beach, where authorities allege that Sajid Akram and his son Naveed opened fire during a Hanukkah celebration attended by Jewish families, killing 15 people and triggering a nationwide debate over security failures and rising antisemitism.

Questioned about Australia’s counterterrorism capabilities before the attack, Burgess acknowledged mounting operational demands on the intelligence service but rejected suggestions that resource constraints had prevented investigations into significant threats.

“We were not leaving serious matters untreated or uninvestigated,” Burgess told the commission, adding that intelligence agencies could not anticipate every potential threat despite extensive monitoring efforts.
He said that, even in hindsight, he believed the agency’s resources were sufficient to address the security challenges it faced at the time.

Burgess is expected to provide further evidence in a closed hearing focused on classified intelligence matters and operational arrangements that cannot be discussed publicly.

The attack has prompted intense scrutiny of Australia’s security framework and sparked broader concerns about the safety of Jewish communities. It also led to calls for stronger measures against violent extremism and hate-motivated attacks.

In response to the shooting, the Australian government announced a package of firearm reforms, including a proposed nationwide gun buyback program. However, implementation has slowed amid difficulties securing support from state and territorial governments, whose cooperation is required for nationwide enforcement.

The inquiry is being led by former High Court judge Virginia Bell and is expected to examine intelligence assessments, law enforcement responses and broader policy issues linked to the attack.

Authorities said alleged gunman Sajid Akram, 50, was killed by police during the assault. His son, Naveed Akram, 24, remains in custody and has been charged with terrorism offenses and 15 counts of murder.

Royal commissions are among Australia’s most powerful public inquiries and can run for months or years while examining evidence and making recommendations for legislative and institutional reform.

The federal inquiry found that Australia’s Jewish community “was the evident target of the attack,” in which Sajid Akram and his son Naveed allegedly opened fire on crowds gathered at the Sydney beachfront suburb on Dec. 14, marking the country’s deadliest mass shooting in three decades.

An email sent by the Community Security Group to police before the event warned that “a terrorist attack against the NSW Jewish Community is likely and there is a high level of antisemitic vilification,” the report said.Police responded that they could not provide dedicated officers for the Hanukkah gathering but said mobile patrols would be sent to “check in and monitor the event,” according to the inquiry.

The commission said police should consider strengthening security arrangements for Jewish celebrations that have a strong public presence, particularly during periods of heightened threat.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said on Thursday the federal government would implement all recommendations made by the inquiry and pledged stronger protections for the community.“I can assure the Australian public that the government will do everything necessary to protect the community in the wake of the Bondi attack,” Albanese told reporters.

Asked whether police had failed to adequately monitor the Bondi event, Albanese said operational responsibility rested with the New South Wales state government.The royal commission, Australia’s highest form of public inquiry, is examining intelligence failures, police preparedness and the broader rise of antisemitism across the country following the attack.

It said Australia’s counter-terrorism capabilities “could be improved” and recommended an immediate review of leadership structures and information-sharing arrangements between agencies responsible for national security and counter-terrorism.

The shooting triggered widespread debate over antisemitism in Australia, public anger over the protection of Jewish communities and renewed political pressure to tighten gun control and hate crime laws.

Victims’ families wrote an open letter in December urging Albanese to establish a federal royal commission into what they described as the rapid rise of antisemitism in Australia.“We demand answers and solutions,” the letter said.

Sajid Akram, 50, was shot dead by police during the attack. His 24-year-old son Naveed, an Australian-born citizen, remains in custody and has been charged with terrorism offenses and 15 counts of murder.

The inquiry is being led by former High Court judge Virginia Bell and is expected to continue examining evidence through public hearings over the coming months.

Akram, 24, is charged with opening fire at a Jewish Hanukkah gathering at Bondi Beach in December, killing 15 people in what police have described as one of the country’s worst mass shootings and an attack inspired by Islamic State.

The accused had sought a 40-year suppression order to block publication of the names, images and identifying details of his mother, brother and sister, arguing that publicity could endanger their safety.

Several Australian media organizations opposed the application, saying it would unduly restrict reporting in a case of significant public interest.Judge Hugh Donnelly ruled against the request, stating that suppression orders should be granted only in exceptional circumstances and that transparency in judicial proceedings was fundamental.

He noted the case had generated “unprecedented public interest, anger, outrage and grief.”The court heard that personal details of Akram’s family had already circulated widely online, while his mother had spoken to local media shortly after the attack.

Donnelly added that any order limited to Australian jurisdiction would be ineffective given the reach of social media and international publications.Akram appeared via video link from a maximum-security prison and did not contest the ruling further.

His lawyer, Richard Wilson, told the court there were no plans to appeal the decision.The December attack shocked Australia, a country with strict gun control laws, and has prompted renewed debate over firearm regulation and rising antisemitism.

The government has since launched a national inquiry into antisemitism and social cohesion, with findings expected later this year, alongside measures to strengthen hate speech legislation.