🔗 Share this article

Legal representatives informed the tribunal that law enforcement had reasonable suspicions that Tommy Robinson's mobile contained material related to acts of terrorism when they detained 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 Tommy Robinson, reportedly declined to hand over his password to officers, claiming it contained “journalistic material.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Eurotunnel on July 28, 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Counter-Terrorism Authority

On the final day of the trial, state lawyer Jo Morris argued that the anti-terror authorities used by law enforcement are intended to allow information collection. She claimed that officers had reasonable suspicion to think Robinson continued to have links to far-right activists, even after the disbandment of the English Defence League (EDL).

While his membership of the English Defence League has ceased, his beliefs have not gone away. He is recognized for having those views and therefore it is a valid concern to believe that on his telephone there could be information relevant to terrorist acts,” she told Westminster magistrates court.

Morris continued, His opinions – to which he is allowed – were not the focus for their concern on 28 July. It was his association to others who are potentially engaged in prohibited activities.”

Details of the Detention

The campaigner had arrived alone at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a friend and was traveling to the Spanish resort 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 previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Defense Arguments

The defendant, who denies failing to comply with anti-terror laws during the incident on 28 July last year, could receive up to 90 days in jail or a potential £2,500 fine if convicted.

His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in closing submissions that anti-terror officers who detained Robinson had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

Referring to testimony from police who stated they contacted other organizations” after arresting him, the defense lawyer said this was a reference to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been presented from MI5 to suggest his client was a security threat.

He asserted the officers’ intervention was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the decision to stop him was recognizing his identity”.

He added that officers had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be properly policed” to try to find out details that was previously available. Williamson proposed that Robinson journeyed to Benidorm frequently, which ought to have reduced the police suspicions about him.

Expenses and Judgment Timing

Robinson claimed that his legal costs in the proceedings were being covered by the tech billionaire, the owner of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an supporter of the campaigner and recently addressed a gathering organized by him in the capital via a livestream.

A proposed day of next Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the magistrate, the judge, after Williamson said his client was due to be a guest of the Israeli government from the midweek 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,” said Williamson.

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