🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the tribunal that police had valid concerns that Tommy Robinson's phone contained information relevant to terrorist activities when they detained him in the previous year as he tried to leave the UK.

Refusal to Provide Phone Password

The right-wing campaigner, using his legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, allegedly declined to hand over his password to police, claiming it contained “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 trial, prosecutor the prosecution argued that the counter-terrorism powers used by law enforcement are intended to allow information collection. She asserted that officers had valid grounds to think Robinson still have links to far-right activists, even after the dissolution of the EDL organization.

“Although his affiliation of the EDL has ceased, his views have not gone away. He is known for having those views and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his telephone there may be information relevant to acts of terrorism,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

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

Details of the Stop

The activist had turned up by himself at the Channel tunnel in a luxury vehicle belonging to a acquaintance and was on his way to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a small bag, the trial heard.

The money was reportedly from a donation drive to offset costs from organizing a large demonstration that occurred the day before in a London landmark.

Legal Team Submissions

The defendant, who disputes non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the encounter on July 28 last year, could receive up to 90 days in prison or a potential £2,500 fine if found guilty.

His lawyer, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in final arguments that anti-terror officers who stopped his client had engaged in a speculative search” 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 no evidence had been presented from the security service to indicate his defendant was a security threat.

Williamson said the officers’ action was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He stated that the “predominant influence” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that officers had used an “extraordinary power that must be carefully regulated” to try to find out details that was previously available. Williamson suggested that Robinson traveled to Benidorm frequently, which should have lessened the police suspicions about him.

Expenses and Judgment Timing

Robinson stated that his court expenses in the case were being covered by Elon Musk, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an ally of the far-right activist and lately addressed a gathering organized by him in London via a online broadcast.

A suggested day of the following Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after Williamson explained Robinson was scheduled to be a guest 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,” said the barrister.

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