🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the tribunal that police had valid concerns indicating Tommy Robinson's mobile contained information related to acts of terrorism when they detained him last year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Provide Phone Pin

The right-wing campaigner, using his real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to hand over his password to officers, stating it contained “journalistic material.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Trial Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Authority

On the last day of the proceedings, state lawyer Jo Morris argued that the anti-terror authorities employed by police are intended to permit information collection. She claimed that police had valid grounds to think the defendant continued to have connections to right-wing groups, even following the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his affiliation of the English Defence League has come to an end, his views have not disappeared. He is recognized for having those opinions and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his telephone there may be data pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

Morris continued, His opinions – to which he is allowed – were not the focus for their attention on 28 July. It was his association to others who are possibly involved in prohibited activities.”

Details of the Detention

The campaigner had turned up alone at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a friend and was on his way to the holiday destination of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the court heard.

The money was reportedly from a collection to offset expenses from arranging a large demonstration that took place the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Arguments

The defendant, who disputes non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the encounter on July 28 of the previous year, could receive up to three months in prison or a potential £2,500 fine if found guilty.

His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who stopped his client had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to evidence from officers who said they called “partner agencies” after arresting him, Williamson claimed this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been presented from MI5 to indicate his defendant was a terrorist.

Williamson asserted the officers’ action was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He said that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He added that police had used an special authority that must be carefully regulated” to try to discover details that was previously available. The barrister proposed that Robinson journeyed to the resort regularly, which should have reduced the police concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

The activist stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by the tech billionaire, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an supporter of the campaigner and lately addressed a rally arranged by him in the capital via a livestream.

A suggested day of the following Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained Robinson was scheduled to be a guest of the Israeli government from the midweek and would not come back until 25 October.

{“I wouldn’t trouble you if this was a trip to Benidorm. I would ask him to rearrange it but he is a guest of a foreign government,” said Williamson.

The judge announced he would hand down his ruling on the start of 4 November.