Alleged teenage terrorist must be tried as an adult, Youth Court told, but his lawyers intend to fight the application

He’s the first teenager to be charged with terrorism offences in SA’s history – but his lawyers weren’t prepared for what prosecutors plan with for the case.

A teenager accused of building a bomb and possessing the information needed to stage a terrorist act must be tried as an adult, a court has heard.

In the Youth Court on Wednesday, SA Police said the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions would take over the case against the boy, 15.

They said an application would be made to have the boy tried as an adult in the District Court – a move the boy’s lawyer said would be staunchly opposed.

The boy has yet to plead to two counts of possessing supplies for, or taking steps in, the manufacture of an explosive.

He is further charged with possessing a document or record of information necessary for a terrorist attack.

Since his arrest in March, the boy’s case has been conducted in near-blanket secrecy, with police claiming any public disclosure would “severely compromise” investigations.

The boy’s case has, to date, been heard in the Adelaide Youth Court.

Previously, the court has told the boy is the first teenager to be charged with terrorism offences in the state’s legal history.

On Wednesday, a police prosecutors said the ODPP had only recently made its intentions known.

“We’ve recently received instructions, as of this week, that prosecutors will seek an application pursuant to Section 17 of the Young Offenders Act,” he said.

Under that section, defendants under the age of 18 can be tried as adults in either the Supreme or District Court, should the Youth Court permit it.

That also allows them to be sentenced as an adult, meaning youth provisions emphasising “care, protection and guidance” in penalty are suspended.

Instead, a young offender is sentenced as an adult in line with principles of personal and general deterrence and a primary focus on the safety of the community.

Counsel for the boy said she had no prior warning of the ODPP’s stance.

“We were not informed until late yesterday of this development, and the application will be opposed,” she said.

The boy was remanded in custody to face court again next month, when the application will be heard before Senior Youth Court Judge Penny Eldridge.