🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the tribunal that law enforcement had valid concerns that Tommy Robinson's mobile contained information related to acts of terrorism when they stopped him in the previous year as he tried to leave the UK.

Denial to Give Device Password

The far-right activist, using his legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, reportedly refused to hand over his password to officers, stating it included “journalistic material.” This occurred after he was stopped at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Anti-Terror Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, state lawyer the prosecution argued that the counter-terrorism powers used by police are intended to allow information collection. She claimed that police had reasonable suspicion to believe Robinson continued to have connections to far-right activists, even after the dissolution of the EDL organization.

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

Morris added, His opinions – to which he is entitled – were not the focus for their concern on 28 July. It was his connection to individuals who are possibly engaged in illegal actions.”

Details of the Stop

The activist had arrived by himself at the Eurotunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a acquaintance and was traveling to the holiday destination of Benidorm with over £13,000 in a carry-on, the court was told.

The funds was reportedly from a collection to cover costs from organizing a large demonstration that occurred the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Arguments

The defendant, who denies failing to comply with anti-terror laws during the incident on July 28 of the previous year, faces up to three months in prison or a potential £2,500 fine if convicted.

His lawyer, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in final arguments that anti-terror officers who stopped Robinson had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

Citing testimony from police who said they contacted other organizations” after detaining him, Williamson claimed this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been offered from MI5 to suggest his defendant was a security threat.

He asserted the police action was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the main factor” on the decision to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He noted that police had used an special authority that must be carefully regulated” to try to find out details that was previously available. The barrister suggested that his client traveled to Benidorm regularly, which should have lessened the officers’ concerns about him.

Expenses and Judgment Timing

The activist stated that his court expenses in the case were being paid for by Elon Musk, the owner of X and Tesla, who has appeared as an supporter of the far-right activist and lately addressed a rally arranged by him in the capital via a livestream.

A proposed date of next Tuesday for the decision was changed by the magistrate, Sam Goozee, after the defense said Robinson was due to be a invitee of the Israeli government from the midweek 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,” said the barrister.

Goozee announced he would deliver his verdict on the start of 4 November.