🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives informed the tribunal that police maintained valid concerns that Tommy Robinson's phone contained material relevant to acts of terrorism when they detained him in the previous year as he attempted to leave the UK.

Denial to Provide Phone Pin

The far-right activist, using his real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly refused to provide his phone pin to police, claiming it included “journalistic material.” This happened after he was stopped at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Arguments 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 designed to allow intelligence gathering. She claimed that police had reasonable suspicion to think Robinson continued to have links to far-right activists, even following the dissolution of the English Defence League (EDL).

“Although his affiliation of the English Defence League has ceased, his views have not gone away. He is recognized for holding those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to believe that on his phone there could be data pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she informed Westminster magistrates court.

Morris continued, His opinions – to which he is entitled – were not the subject for their concern on 28 July. It was his association to individuals who are potentially involved in illegal actions.”

Circumstances of the Stop

The activist had turned up by himself at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a friend and was on his way to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a small bag, the trial was told.

The funds was said to have been from a collection to cover costs from arranging a major rally that took place the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Defense Arguments

The defendant, who denies failing to comply with anti-terror laws during the incident on July 28 last year, could receive up to three months in jail or a possible £2,500 fine if convicted.

His lawyer, Alisdair Williamson KC, said in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who detained his client had engaged in a “fishing expedition” and that he had been illegally held.

Citing testimony from police who stated they called “partner agencies” after arresting him, the defense lawyer said this was a reference to the security services and that lack of proof had been presented from the security service to indicate his client was a security threat.

He asserted the officers’ intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He stated that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that police had used an “extraordinary power that must be properly policed” to try to discover details that was already known. The barrister suggested that his client traveled to the resort regularly, which ought to have reduced the officers’ concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Timing

Robinson claimed that his court expenses in the proceedings were being covered by the tech billionaire, the proprietor of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an supporter of the far-right activist and lately spoke at a rally organized by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A suggested date of next Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the magistrate, the judge, after Williamson explained his client was scheduled to be a invitee of the Israeli government from Wednesday and would not return 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,” stated the barrister.

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