The man who killed MP Sir David Amess was released from the Prevent anti-terror programme “too quickly”, a review has found.

Sir David was stabbed to death by Islamic State (ISIS) supporter Ali Harbi Ali during a constituency surgery at a church hall in Leigh-on-Sea in October 2021.

The killer, who was given a whole-life sentence, had become radicalised by ISIS propaganda and had been referred to the anti-terror programme Prevent before the attack, but his case had been closed five years before.

Despite Prevent policy and guidance at the time being “mostly followed”, his case was “exited too quickly”, security minister Dan Jarvis told the House of Commons on Wednesday.

Following the publication of a review into Prevent’s handling of Southport child killer Axel Rudakubana earlier this month, Mr Jarvis said a Prevent learning review into Sir David’s killing would be released this week in a commitment to transparency over the anti-terror programme.

Matt Juke, head of counter-terrorism policing, said it is clear the management and handling of Ali’s case by Prevent “should have been better” and it is “critical” the review is acted on “so that other families are spared the pain felt by the loved ones of Sir David”.

The review found:

• Ali was referred to Prevent in 2014 by his school after teachers said his demeanour, appearance and behaviour changed from a previously “engaging student with a bright future” with aspirations to be a doctor to failing his A-levels and wanting to move to a “more Islamic state because he could no longer live among unbelievers”

• Prevent quickly took his case on and he was referred to Channel, part of the programme that aims to prevent involvement in extremism

• He was “exited from Prevent too quickly”, Mr Jarvis said, just five months later “after his terrorism risk was assessed as low”

• A review by police 12 months after he was released from Prevent “also found no terrorism concerns” and the case was closed. This was not uploaded for eight more months due to an “IT issue”

• People released from Prevent are meant to have a review at six and 12 months

• The assessment of Ali’s vulnerabilities “was problematic and outdated” as it did not follow the proper procedure, which led to “questionable decision-making and sub-optimal handling of the case”

• Ali’s symptoms were prioritised over addressing the underlying causes of his vulnerabilities – and support provided did not tackle those issues

• Record keeping of decisions, actions and rationale was “problematic, disjointed and lacked clarity”

• The rationale for certain decisions was “not explicit”

• Ali’s school was not involved in discussions to help determine risk and appropriate support – they were only called once to be told the “matter was being dealt with”

• A miscommunication led to only one intervention session being provided, instead of two.

Read more:
Sir David Amess’ daughter taking legal action

The review found most of the failures in Ali’s case would not be repeated today as the guidance and requirements are much clearer.

It said referrers, in Ali’s case his school, are kept informed and engaged, different departments and agencies – not just police – have clear roles, which records need to be kept is clear and guidance for detecting underlying vulnerabilities has changed and would have made a difference.

The review said a Prevent “intervention provider” met Ali at a McDonald’s to deal with his understanding of “haram” (forbidden under Islamic law). No risk assessment was made but they suggested one more meeting, however a breakdown in communication between police and the provider meant there were no more meetings.

Training for providers is “substantially different” now and the review says this would not be repeated today, with the provider in question saying the process is “a completely different one today”.

However, the review said there are still problems – not just in Ali’s case – with the Vulnerability Assessment Form, an “incredibly complex document that is vital to Channel” and the progression of a case.

It also found a decision by the College of Police to only hold Prevent case data for five years “may prove to be problematic” and if Ali’s case material had been deleted under that ruling “it would have been nigh on impossible to conduct this review.

Sir David’s daughter, Katie Amess, 39, last week welcomed the announcement to publish a review into Ali’s case but said every victim failed by Prevent deserves an inquiry, not just the Southport victims.

“We potentially wouldn’t be in the same situation today with repeat failings of Prevent had somebody had just listened to me back when it [her father’s killing] happened and launched a full public inquiry,” she told LBC.

Ms Amess said she believes if the Southport attack had not happened, the review into Prevent’s handling of her father’s killer would never have been released into the public domain.

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.

Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

You can receive Breaking News alerts on a smartphone or tablet via the Sky News App. You can also follow @SkyNews on X or subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up with the latest news.