🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors told the tribunal that police had reasonable suspicions that Tommy Robinson's mobile contained material relevant to acts of terrorism when they stopped him last year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Denial to Give Phone Pin

The far-right activist, using his legal name is Tommy Robinson, allegedly declined to provide his phone pin to police, claiming it included “journalistic material.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 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 law enforcement are intended to allow information collection. She claimed that officers had valid grounds to think Robinson continued to have connections to right-wing groups, even after the dissolution of the EDL organization.

While his membership of the EDL has come to an end, his views have not gone away. He is recognized for having those opinions and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his phone there could be data relevant to terrorist acts,” she told the court.

The prosecutor continued, “His beliefs – to which he is entitled – were not the focus for their concern on 28 July. It was his connection to others who are potentially involved in illegal actions.”

Details of the Stop

The campaigner had turned up by himself at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley owned by a acquaintance and was traveling to the Spanish resort of the Spanish coast with more than £13,000 in a small bag, the court heard.

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

Legal Team Arguments

The defendant, who disputes non-compliance with counter-terrorism powers during the encounter on July 28 last year, faces up to three months in jail or a potential £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

His lawyer, Alisdair Williamson KC, argued in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who detained Robinson had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been illegally held.

Referring to evidence from police who said they contacted other organizations” after detaining Robinson, the defense lawyer said this was a allusion to the security services and that lack of proof had been presented from the security service to suggest his client was a security threat.

He said the officers’ action was biased” because it was based to a “significant degree on a personal attribute.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the choice to stop him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He noted that police had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be carefully regulated” to try to discover information that was previously available. The barrister suggested that his client traveled to the resort regularly, which ought to have lessened the police suspicions about him.

Expenses and Verdict Timing

The activist stated that his legal costs in the case were being covered by the tech billionaire, the proprietor of X and Tesla, who has emerged as an ally of the campaigner and recently addressed a gathering arranged by him in the capital via a livestream.

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 guest of the Israel's administration 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,” stated Williamson.

The judge said he would deliver his verdict on the start of 4 November.