🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives informed the tribunal that law enforcement maintained reasonable suspicions indicating Tommy Robinson's mobile held material 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 far-right activist, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly refused to provide his phone pin to officers, stating it contained journalist content.” This occurred after he was stopped at the Eurotunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Counter-Terrorism Authority

On the final day of the proceedings, state lawyer the prosecution stated that the anti-terror authorities employed by police are intended to permit intelligence gathering. She asserted that officers had valid grounds to believe the defendant continued to have connections to far-right activists, even following the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his affiliation of the English Defence League has come to an end, his beliefs have not gone away. He is known for having those views and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his phone there may be data relevant to acts of terrorism,” she informed the court.

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

Circumstances of the Stop

The campaigner had arrived alone at the Channel tunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a friend and was on his way to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial heard.

The funds was said to have been from a collection to cover expenses from arranging a major rally that occurred the day before in a London landmark.

Defense Arguments

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

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who detained his client had engaged in a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

Citing evidence from officers who said they contacted other organizations” after arresting Robinson, Williamson claimed this was a reference to the security services and that lack of proof had been presented from MI5 to indicate his defendant was a security threat.

Williamson asserted the police intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He stated that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He noted that police had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be properly policed” to try to find out details that was already known. Williamson suggested that Robinson traveled to the resort frequently, which ought to have lessened the officers’ suspicions about him.

Legal Costs and Judgment Date

The activist stated that his court expenses in the proceedings were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the owner of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an supporter of the far-right activist and recently addressed a rally organized by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A proposed day of the following Tuesday for the decision was changed by the district judge, the judge, after the defense explained Robinson was due to be a guest of the Israeli government from Wednesday and would not come back until October 25.

{“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.

Goozee said he would hand down his verdict on the morning of 4 November.