Damning report on 10-year-old Sara Sharif is kept secret by the council, whose blunders led to her death… to protect the rights of her murderous father, who will never be released from prison

A shocking report into abuse committed by Sara Sharif’s father that could have saved her life has been kept secret due to the killer’s data protection rights.

A damning review in November found that social workers had evidence of Sharif’s “extensive” domestic violence before he started attacking 10-year-old Sara, but that this was “lost in the system”.

Surrey County Council is now trying to prevent its publication amid fears it would breach Urfan Sharif’s rights.

Sharif was ordered to participate in a program for perpetrators of domestic violence in 2016 after Sara’s mother accused him of beating her and children.

He admitted to “extensive and extensive domestic violence” but attended only eight of 26 sessions and experts said there was “not enough evidence” he had changed his behavior.

Despite the report containing a ‘shocking read’, a social worker failed to complete an analysis and it was not added to Sara’s safety report.

As a result, a judge decided to fatally transfer Sara to the care of her abusive father, unaware of the risk posed by a man with a sixteen-year history of attacking women and children.

Within a short time, the 44-year-old began torturing his daughter in atrocities described by a judge as the worst crime he had ever encountered.

Ten-year-old Sara Sharif was tortured by her father in atrocities described by a judge as the worst crime he had ever encountered

Sara’s body was found at the family home in Woking, Surrey. She had been abused with a cricket bat, a metal pole and a rolling pin, strangled until her neck was broken, burned and bitten

Sara suffered more than a hundred injuries when she was tied up and a plastic bag with parcel tape was tied over her head. She was then assaulted with a cricket bat, a metal pole and a rolling pin, strangled until her neck was broken, burned with an iron and bitten.

Now Surrey County Council has refused to publish the domestic violence report on Sharif under freedom of information laws, saying it would breach the killer’s data protection rights.

Woking MP Will Forster has called for special measures for the council.

He said: ‘This is absolutely terrible. This man is in jail for killing his daughter and Surrey County Council is concerned about data protection. If they had been as concerned about protecting vulnerable children, this might never have happened.

“This report was an opportunity to save her, but it was lost in the system. Now this is about avoiding responsibility.”

In another blunder, the Daily Mail has learned that Sharif, a taxi driver, was given permission by the council to transport children with special educational needs to school despite reports to police that he had abused women and children.

The council granted Sharif a taxi license for SEND transport before Sara’s death because intelligence was not shared between departments.

Last November, a child protection investigation into Sara’s death found authorities feared ‘causing offence’.

After killing Sara in August 2023, Sharif fled to his native Pakistan with his accomplice wife Beinash Batool, before calling 999 to confess to the murder, thinking he had gotten away with it.

Social workers, police, and teachers had all been aware of Sara’s unexplained injuries since her birth, but professionals did not “connect the dots” and missed crucial opportunities to intervene due to misplaced concerns about racial sensitivities.

As a result, the risk posed by Sharif was “overlooked, unheeded and underestimated by almost all professionals.”

Sara was murdered at the family home in Woking in August 2023. Sharif fled to his native Pakistan with his accomplice wife Beinash Batool, 31, before calling 999 to confess to the murder, thinking he was getting away with it. But he was captured and extradited, and the murderous couple received life sentences in December 2024.

A municipal spokesperson said: ‘This request relates to the personal data of a living person. Data protection legislation determines what can and cannot be shared about an individual’s data, and as a public body, Surrey County Council must comply with all data protection principles when processing personal data.”

Council leader Tim Oliver added: “An independent safety review was published last year. We deeply regret the findings that affect us as a local government. We take the findings with the utmost seriousness.”