Federal Court of Australia

Lee v Benbrika (No 2) [2026] FCA 907

ORDERS

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.    Until further Order, there shall be no publication or disclosure of:

(a)    The 10 page “Countering Violent Extremism Unit Program Intervention Report” (Victoria Police, undated);

(b)    Paragraph 80 of the “Statement of Facts Relating to why the Order Should be Made” filed by the applicant in this proceeding; and

(c)    The affidavit of Julian Horan marked “Confidential” and consisting of 29 paragraphs filed on 1 July 2026.

This Order is made under s 37AF of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) on the basis that the Order is necessary to prevent prejudice to the administration of justice and to the interests of the Commonwealth or a State or Territory in relation to national or international security.

2.    The matter be listed for a case management hearing as soon as practicable on a date to be notified to the parties.

3.    A copy of these Orders be served on the applicant and the respondent forthwith.

Note:    Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Delivered Ex Tempore and Revised)

RANGIAH J:

1    On 1 July 2026, the Chief Commissioner of Victoria Police (the Chief Commissioner) filed an interlocutory application seeking the following orders:

1.    Until further order or for a period of 10 years, there shall be no publication or disclosure of:

a.    The 10 page “Countering Violent Extremism Unit Program Intervention Report” (Victoria Police, undated); and

b.    Paragraph 80 of the “Statement of Facts Relating to why the Order Should be Made” filed by the Applicant in this proceeding.

2.    This order is made under s 37AF of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 on the basis that the order is necessary to prevent prejudice to the interests of the Commonwealth or a State or Territory in relation to national or international security.

2    The application presently before the Court seeks interim suppression orders in respect of the same documents on an urgent basis.

3    It is necessary to describe some of the factual background and prior legal proceedings in order to explain why the interim and interlocutory orders are being sought.

4    In 2008, the respondent, Abdul Nacer Benbrika, was convicted of terrorism offences in the Supreme Court of Victoria and, in 2009, he was sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 12 years.

5    Acting Superintendent Julian Horan, whose substantive position is as Inspector of the Countering Violent Extremism Unit of Victoria Police, deposes that the respondent participated in a deradicalisation program known as the Community Integration Support Program (CISP) between 2018 and 2023.

6    In proceeding VID670 of 2020, the applicant, Scott Lee, a former Assistant Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police, applied for an interim control order in respect of the respondent, pursuant to s 104.3 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth). On 1 December 2020, Besanko J made an interim control order in Lee v Benbrika [2020] FCA 1723.

7    Importantly, on 21 October 2020, Besanko J made the following order (the suppression order):

4.    The 10 page “Countering Violent Extremism Unit Program Intervention Report”, undated by Victoria Police and the contents of the yellow highlighted portions of:

(a)    the “Violent Extremism Assessment and Recommendation Report” (first report) by Kelly Mischel, dated 2 August 2020, pp 3, 11, 12, 13, 24, 25 and 27;

(b)    the “Violent Extremism Assessment and Recommendation Report” (second report) by Kelly Mischel, dated 2 August 2020, pp 2 and 7;

(c)    the first report of Chelsea Dewson, dated 7 August 2020, pp 5, 23, 24 & 25; and

(d)    the second report of Chelsea Dewson, dated 31 August 2020, p 18;

not be published or broadcast in Victoria or elsewhere in Australia pursuant to s 37AF of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). This order is necessary to prevent prejudice to the proper administration of justice and to prevent prejudice to the interests of the Commonwealth or a State or Territory in relation to national or international security.

…

6.    These orders operate:

(a)    for a period of 5 years from 21 October 2020; or

(b)    until further order,

whichever occurs first.

8    On 9 October 2025, the Chief Commissioner obtained an extension of a suppression order in respect of similar material that had been made by the Supreme Court of Victoria in the context of a proceeding against the respondent for a continuing detention order. However, it appears that no similar application was made in respect of Besanko J’s suppression order due to oversight on the part of Victoria Police. The suppression order then ceased to operate after 21 October 2025.

9    The interim order presently sought is in respect of one of the documents covered by Besanko J’s order of 21 October 2020, namely, a report entitled “Countering Violent Extremism Unit Program Intervention Report” (the Intervention Report), but not the other documents identified in that order.

10    The Chief Commissioner also seeks an interim suppression order in respect of a document described as “Statement of Facts Relating to why the Order Should be Made” filed by the applicant in the proceeding before Besanko J. That document was not covered by the order of 21 October 2020. The document draws upon material contained in the Intervention Report. Apparently through oversight on the part of Victoria Police, this document was not the subject of the application before Besanko J.

11    Acting Superintendent Horan has sworn two affidavits in the proceeding, one on an open basis and one on a confidential basis. He explains that a suppression order is sought in respect of the Intervention Report because it contains details about the operation of the CISP and may undermine the security of persons involved in that program and undermine the methodologies used. In Acting Superintendent Horan’s opinion, the safety of persons and the effectiveness of the CISP would be compromised if the Intervention Report were to become publicly available.

12    The interlocutory application seeks a “suppression order” within the meaning of s 37AA of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) (the FCA Act).

13    I have had regard to Acting Superintendent Horan’s open affidavit and his confidential affidavit, and the Intervention Report itself. I am satisfied that there is a sufficient risk of prejudice to the administration of justice and to the interests of the Commonwealth or a State or Territory to warrant the making of an interim suppression order under s 37AF of the FCA Act.

14    I note that the Australian Federal Police and the respondent were served with the non-confidential material on the morning of the interlocutory hearing on 3 July 2026. The Australian Federal Police indicated that they did not object to the interim order sought by the Chief Commissioner.

15    The respondent’s lawyers indicated by email that they had not yet been able to obtain instructions, and they did not appear at the hearing. Despite the shortness of the notice provided to the respondent, I am satisfied that the urgency of the application justifies the making of the interim order. I observe that the respondent did not object to the making of the suppression order of 21 October 2020.

16    Accordingly, I will make the interim orders sought. The orders will also cover the confidential affidavit of Acting Superintendent Horan.

Associate:    

Dated: 13 July 2026