Southport Killer Axel Rudakubana Was on Anti-Terror Radar—Case Closed Too Soon

A new review into the counter-terrorism Prevent program has revealed serious shortcomings in handling the case of Axel Rudakubana, raising significant concerns over missed opportunities to manage an emerging terror threat. The report, released today, indicates that there was sufficient evidence to treat Rudakubana as a potential terrorist and that his repeated referrals to the Prevent scheme should have escalated his case to the multi-agency Channel process.

Rudakubana, whose concerning behavior began during his early teens, was referred to Prevent on three separate occasions before the tragic murders of Bebe King, Elsie Dot Stancombe, and Alice da Silva Aguiar on July 29 of last year, reported by GOV.UK. The review concluded that counter-terrorism officers erred by not advancing his case when warning signs were evident. In particular, it found that his file was closed prematurely despite enough evidence to maintain active monitoring as more information emerged.

Security Minister Dan Jarvis detailed the troubling progression of events during a Commons debate. He stated:
“A review into counter-terrorism program Prevent has said there was sufficient evidence to consider Axel Rudakubana a terror threat. Rudakubana was referred to the counter-terrorism-led scheme on three occasions in the years before he murdered Bebe King, Elsie Dot Stancombe, and Alice da Silva Aguiar on July 29 last year.

The report, published today, concluded counter-terrorism officers were wrong to not escalate his case as a potential terror threat. It also found there was enough evidence for Prevent officers to refer Rudakubana to the next stage of the scheme, called Channel, which aims to divert individuals from being radicalized.”

Jarvis provided further details on the timeline of referrals: “The perpetrator was referred to Prevent three times between December 2019 when he was aged 13 and April 2021 when he was 14. Those referrals were made by his schools. ‘The first referral reported concerns about him carrying a knife and searching for school shootings on the internet. The second referral was focused on his online activity relating to Libya and Gaddafi. His third referral was for searching for London bombings, the IRA, and the Israel-Palestine conflict.

On each of these occasions, the decision at the time was that the perpetrator should not progress to the channel multi-agency process. However, the Prevent learning review found that there was sufficient risk for the perpetrator to have been managed through Prevent. It found that the referral was closed prematurely, and there was sufficient concern to keep the case active while further information was collected.'”

Jarvis also confirmed that a Prevent learning review into the 2021 killing of Southend West Conservative MP Sir David Amess is set to be published next week. “Transparency and enabling public scrutiny is also fundamental, and that is why we will take steps to publish the findings of other independent Prevent learning reviews where there has been an incident of national significance. Next week we will publish the Prevent Learning Review into the appalling attack on Sir David Amess, to enable further public scrutiny of this important program.”

The inquiry has drawn criticism from Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp, who demanded that the investigation into Rudakubana also review past mental health interventions. He urged Home Office Minister Dan Jarvis to “confirm that it will be a statutory inquiry” so that the process can compel witness attendance, secure evidence under oath, and retrieve critical documents.

Jarvis acknowledged Rudakubana’s dangerous fascinations, noting his interest in the Manchester Arena bombing and discussions about stabbing people. The minister stressed that the review found too much focus was placed on the lack of a distinct ideology rather than on the perpetrator’s susceptibility, grievances, and complex needs. The findings underscore the need for coordinated, multi-agency risk management—a process that might have prevented the subsequent tragedy.