🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives told the court that law enforcement maintained reasonable suspicions that Tommy Robinson's mobile contained material related to terrorist activities when they detained him in the previous year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Denial to Provide Device Password

The far-right activist, whose legal name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly refused to provide his phone pin to police, claiming it contained journalist content.” This happened after he was stopped at the Eurotunnel on 28 July 2024.

Trial Arguments on Counter-Terrorism Authority

On the last day of the proceedings, prosecutor the prosecution stated that the counter-terrorism powers employed by police are designed to permit information collection. She claimed that officers had reasonable suspicion to believe Robinson continued to have links to right-wing groups, even after the dissolution of the EDL organization.

“Although his membership of the EDL has ceased, his beliefs have not gone away. He is recognized for holding those opinions and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his phone there may be information relevant to terrorist acts,” she told the court.

Morris continued, “His beliefs – to which he is allowed – were not the focus for their concern on July 28. It was his association to others who are possibly engaged in illegal actions.”

Circumstances of the Detention

The activist had arrived alone at the Channel tunnel in a luxury vehicle owned by a friend and was traveling to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial heard.

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

Legal Team Arguments

Robinson, who disputes non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on July 28 last year, faces up to 90 days in prison or a possible £2,500 fine if found guilty.

His lawyer, Alisdair Williamson KC, said in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who stopped Robinson had conducted a “fishing expedition” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Citing evidence from officers who said they called “partner agencies” after arresting Robinson, Williamson said this was a reference to the security services and that no evidence had been presented from the security service to suggest his client was a security threat.

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

He noted that officers had used an special authority that needs to be properly policed” to try to find out details that was previously available. Williamson suggested that his client journeyed to Benidorm frequently, which should have reduced the officers’ concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Timing

The activist claimed that his legal costs in the proceedings were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the owner of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an ally of the far-right activist and lately addressed a rally arranged by him in London via a online broadcast.

A proposed date of next Tuesday for the verdict was changed by the district judge, Sam Goozee, after the defense explained his client was due to be a invitee of the Israeli government from Wednesday and would not come back 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 hand down his ruling on the start of 4 November.