Terrorist Abdalraouf Abdallah, the childhood friend of Manchester Arena attacker Salman Abedi, has lost a bid to be freed from jail.
The 31-year-old faced a parole review after being recalled to prison for breaching licence conditions in January 2021.
But, despite the decision, he is still due to walk free from prison later this year when his sentence expires.
The Islamic extremist played an “important role” in Abedi’s radicalisation, according to a report from the inquiry into the attack.
Abedi visited him in prison and experts believe he groomed the bomber but Abdallah has denied any involvement in the 2017 atrocity.
In a statement on Monday, the Parole Board said: “Following four oral hearing days and a dossier of evidence of over 1,800 pages, we can confirm that a panel of the Parole Board refused the release of Abdalraouf Abdallah.
“Parole Board decisions are solely focused on what risk a prisoner could represent to the public if released and whether that risk is manageable in the community. The panel of the Parole Board were not satisfied that he no longer posed a risk to the public, and accordingly did not direct his release.
“Due to the nature of his extended determinate sentence, law determines that he will be automatically released when his sentence expires. The sentence expiry date in November is determined by the period of punishment set by the sentencing judge.”
Abdallah was handed an extended sentence of nine-and-a-half years, including a five-and-a-half year prison term, in 2016 after he was found guilty of preparing and funding acts of terrorism by helping four others travel to Syria and was released from prison in 2020.
He had previously been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder after becoming paraplegic when injured in fighting in Libya in 2011 during the country’s uprising.
His case was considered by the Parole Board over four days on April 8 and 9, July 1 and 31 2024. The hearing days on April 8 and 9 were conducted at the prison where Abdallah is held, while the latter dates were held remotely by via videolink.
According to a report from the board, the parole review panel accepted the finding of the Manchester Arena Public Inquiry that the defendant “had played a significant role in radicalising the Manchester Arena bomber, although there was no evidence that he was involved in the attack itself or had any pre-knowledge of it”.
The report also said Abdallah had undertaken an accredited programme intended to address the motivations behind his offending “and the beliefs which enable it”.
He also undertook a one-to-one rehabilitative support programme intended to “manage the risk of individuals who have been involved in extremist or terrorism-related activity”.
Despite this, his community-based probation officer, prison-based officer and prison-instructed psychologist did not support his release, with assessments determining he posed a “high risk of serious harm to the public”.
Prison psychologists concluded that Abdallah continued to show levels of engagement with extremism and intent to commit terrorist-related offending.
A release plan presented to the panel was also deemed “not robust enough” to manage him in the community as he “retained a propensity to radicalise others” and there was insufficient evidence to suggest there had been any change in his extremist mindset.
The panel concluded that Abdallah retained an extremist mindset and continued to pose a risk of radicalising others, including those “in any accommodation he is released to or any other person with whom he may come in contact”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel