In a sudden development at Melbourne Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday, Ibrahim Benbrika – the 26-year-old son of notorious convicted Australian terrorist leader Abdul Nacer Benbrika – entered guilty pleas alongside two co-accused to charges of robbery, common assault, and illegal controlled weapon possession, wrapping up a hearing that had been scheduled to span two days.
Benbrika’s co-offenders, 24-year-old Michel El-Chikhani and 24-year-old Oways Afaneh, also confirmed their guilty pleas in court before magistrate James FitzGerald. Prosecutor Michael Roper laid out the details of the Crown’s carefully compiled case against the three men, outlining how the elaborate scheme unfolded from September 2024 onward.
According to Roper’s account, the 43-year-old victim, who had no prior connection to any of the three defendants, initiated conversations on Facebook with a profile operating under the name “Holly”. Over the course of several months, the pair exchanged messages discussing an agreement for sex in exchange for money, eventually arranging a meeting at an isolated Melbourne nature reserve around 11 p.m. on January 24 this year.
When the victim arrived at the pre-arranged site, he was not met by “Holly”. Instead, Benbrika, El-Chikhani and Afaneh emerged, clad entirely in black and wearing balaclavas to conceal their identities. The trio immediately knocked the victim to the ground, delivering repeated punches and kicks while demanding his mobile phone and cash. Court documents and evidence presented during the hearing detailed particularly threatening moments: Benbrika was captured on video pressing a sheathed knife against the victim’s head, while El-Chikhani held a sharp hunting knife directly to the man’s throat at one point during the attack.
After subduing the victim, Benbrika dragged him in a headlock back to his own vehicle. There, El-Chikhani used the victim’s own phone to complete an unauthorized bank transfer of $250 to the group. In addition to the stolen cash, the trio also took two of the victim’s mobile phones, his official identity documents, and a portable battery pack before fleeing the scene. The victim managed to flag down a passing motorist for help and was subsequently transported to a local hospital for treatment of his injuries.
Roper emphasized the premeditated nature of the attack, telling the court: “This was a planned luring of a victim to a place that they’re alone at night. They are confronted by three armed men and terrorised.” Digital evidence recovered from the defendants’ phones corroborated the prosecution’s account: investigators found Snapchat clips recording segments of the assault stored on both Afaneh and Benbrika’s devices. Another video, recovered from the devices, captures the three men sitting around a kitchen table after the attack discussing their actions, with one referencing the idea of “catching pedophiles”.
Defense lawyer Veronika Drago, representing Benbrika, told the court that this offhand comment provides critical context for the entire incident, a detail she says was omitted from the prosecution’s initial summary. Drago explained that the “Holly” Facebook profile listed the account holder as an underage minor, leading the three men to frame their actions as a vigilante attempt to apprehend a child predator. “These are three young and very foolish men,” Drago told the court, adding that the ongoing notoriety of Benbrika’s father has cast a shadow over every aspect of her client’s life, from persistent bullying during his school years to his current placement in a protective custody unit while awaiting sentencing.
Abdul Nacer Benbrika, Ibrahim’s father, is one of Australia’s most high-profile convicted terrorists. He was sentenced to 15 years in prison in 2009 for leading a domestic terror cell plotting attacks both within Australia and abroad. He completed his original custodial sentence in November 2020, but remained in detention under continuing detention orders until his release in December 2023, after serving 18 years total behind bars.
Despite pushback from the prosecution, magistrate FitzGerald ruled that the case would remain within the jurisdiction of the Magistrates’ Court, rather than being elevated to the higher County Court for a plea hearing. FitzGerald noted that there was insufficient evidence before the court to confirm whether the trio had planned the attack over three months, or only became aware of the planned rendezvous shortly before the meeting. Still, he acknowledged the severity of the offense, calling it a “very aggressive attack on a person in the middle of the night” that must have been terrifying for the victim. All three defendants are scheduled to return to court on Wednesday for a scheduled pre-sentence hearing.
