Rangzieb Ahmed, who was convicted in 2008 of directing terrorism in Britain, will have a fresh Parole Board hearing, the board has confirmed. A spokesperson said the hearing will be held orally and that no date has yet been set.
Ahmed was jailed for life with a minimum term of 10 years after a trial in which prosecutors said he led a three-man Al-Qaeda cell that plotted mass attacks in the United Kingdom. He was the first person in the country convicted of directing terrorism on behalf of Al-Qaeda, and was linked in reporting and at trial to the July 7, 2005, London bombings and to a separate failed plot two weeks later.
Parole Board officials said experts will consider Ahmed’s case and decide whether to direct it to a full hearing, to grant release, or to block release. Ahmed has been refused parole on multiple occasions. The board denied him release in September 2022 after concluding he remained too dangerous to be freed. He was later ordered to take part in a deradicalisation programme in 2023, and a subsequent bid for freedom was blocked in 2024.
A prior Parole Board report cited a range of factors it considered increased Ahmed’s risk of reoffending. The panel wrote that the sentencing judge had found Ahmed to be "dedicated to the cause of Islamic Terrorism" and that Ahmed believed it was his religious duty to offend. The report listed risk factors including a need to redress perceived injustice, a need to defend against threats, and a need for identity, meaning and belonging. The panel added that Ahmed had a need for status and excitement, a need to dominate others, and was considered susceptible to indoctrination; it said his interpretations of his faith were an additional risk factor.
Legal filings previously show Ahmed contested his treatment in custody and alleged he had been tortured while detained in Pakistan; a High Court case in 2020 involved a range of UK government agencies. Lord Hermer, who later served as Attorney General, acted for Ahmed in that 2020 High Court action while still in private practice, according to reporting. That bid to obtain compensation was unsuccessful.
Prisoners serving life sentences in England and Wales are eligible to apply to the Parole Board once their minimum term has been served, but release is granted only when the board is satisfied the individual no longer poses a risk to the public. The board typically considers evidence from prison authorities, psychologists, risk assessments, victim statements and other relevant documents before deciding whether to hold an oral hearing or to direct a full panel.
Ahmed’s case has remained prominent given the connections identified at his trial and the seriousness of the offences. Prosecutors at the original trial presented material they said showed links between Ahmed and UK-based extremists and foreign jihadist networks. Since his conviction he has been the subject of periodic reviews by parole authorities, which have repeatedly identified concerns about his potential for reoffending.
The Parole Board did not disclose when the oral hearing will take place or provide further details about the scope of evidence to be considered. When an oral hearing is held, the board may hear submissions from the prisoner and their legal representatives and may consider updated risk assessments and reports on progression through rehabilitation and deradicalisation programmes.
Officials have previously emphasised that parole decisions balance public protection with the legal provisions allowing release when it is safe to do so. The latest move by the Parole Board means Ahmed’s risk, behaviour in custody and any progress on rehabilitation will be re-examined before a final decision is made.