ASIO vs ABC: Broadcaster Defends Bondi Investigation Amid Spy Agency Rebuke
February 9, 2026 — 12:57pm
In a rare public statement, ASIO has expressed "grave concerns" about the accuracy of an ABC Four Corners investigation into the Bondi massacre, set to air on Monday night, and threatened further action if false claims are broadcast.
The statement, released on Sunday evening, accuses the ABC of relying on an "unreliable and disgruntled" source who misidentified one of the alleged gunmen, 24-year-old Naveed Akram, and confused his actions with those of another individual.
The ABC stands by its story, emphasizing extensive reporting and multiple sources. ASIO, which hasn't seen the program, claims its response is limited due to the ongoing royal commission into antisemitism and the criminal investigation against Akram.
Akram faces charges for the December 14 attack, where his father and alleged co-conspirator, Sajid Akram, were killed by police.
The first part of the Four Corners investigation, led by Mark Willacy, aired last week, detailing the attack's events through witness accounts. The second part, led by Sean Rubinsztein-Dunlop, will delve into the terrorists' secret lives, according to the ABC.
ASIO's statement, released preemptively, highlights the agency's 2019 investigation of Naveed Akram using its most sensitive capabilities, concluding he didn't adhere to violent extremism. They express concerns about Four Corners' claims, citing significant factual errors.
ASIO warns of potential legal action if the ABC publishes unverified claims. The Bondi royal commission, due to submit its report by April, will examine intelligence and law enforcement effectiveness in preventing the attack.
ASIO refutes ABC accusations of understaffing and suggests that redundancies in 2020 didn't impact their ability to prevent the massacre. They emphasize their lack of knowledge about the perpetrators' plans.
An ABC spokesperson defends the program, citing comprehensive reporting and multiple sources. The investigation aims to provide a detailed picture of the Akrams' actions and associations leading up to the attack.
Reporter Rubinsztein-Dunlop declined to comment. The dispute highlights the challenges in balancing investigative journalism with national security concerns.
