🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the tribunal that law enforcement had reasonable suspicions that Tommy Robinson's mobile held information relevant to terrorist activities when they detained him in the previous year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Refusal to Provide Phone Password

The far-right activist, using his real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to hand over his phone pin to officers, claiming it contained journalist content.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Authority

On the final day of the proceedings, state lawyer Jo Morris stated that the anti-terror authorities used by law enforcement are intended to allow information collection. She claimed that officers had reasonable suspicion to think Robinson still have links to far-right activists, even following the disbandment of the EDL organization.

While his affiliation of the English Defence League has ceased, his beliefs have not disappeared. He is known for holding those views and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his phone there could be data pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she told the court.

The prosecutor continued, His opinions – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their attention on July 28. It was his association to individuals who are possibly engaged in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Stop

The campaigner had arrived alone at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a acquaintance and was on his way to the holiday destination of the Spanish coast with over £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 occurred the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Arguments

Robinson, who disputes failing to comply with counter-terrorism powers during the encounter on July 28 of the previous year, could receive up to 90 days in prison or a possible £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

His lawyer, Alisdair Williamson KC, said in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who stopped his client had conducted a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Citing testimony from officers who stated they called other organizations” after detaining Robinson, the defense lawyer said this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that no evidence had been offered from MI5 to suggest his defendant was a terrorist.

Williamson asserted the police intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the “predominant influence” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that officers had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be carefully regulated” to try to find out information that was already known. Williamson suggested that his client journeyed to Benidorm regularly, which should have reduced the officers’ suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Timing

Robinson stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by Elon Musk, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an supporter of the far-right activist and recently spoke at a gathering arranged by him in the capital via a livestream.

A proposed day of next Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the magistrate, the judge, after Williamson explained Robinson was due to be a invitee of the Israeli government from the midweek and would not return 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,” stated the barrister.

The judge said he would deliver his ruling on the morning of 4 November.