🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the tribunal that law enforcement had reasonable suspicions indicating Tommy Robinson's phone contained material related to acts of terrorism when they detained him last year as he tried to depart from the UK.

Refusal to Give Device Password

The right-wing campaigner, using his legal name is Tommy Robinson, allegedly declined to provide his password to police, claiming it included “journalistic material.” This occurred after he was stopped at the Eurotunnel on July 28, 2024.

Trial Arguments on Anti-Terror Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, state lawyer Jo Morris stated that the counter-terrorism powers employed by law enforcement are designed to allow intelligence gathering. She asserted that officers had valid grounds to believe Robinson continued to have connections to right-wing groups, even after the dissolution of the EDL organization.

While his affiliation of the EDL has ceased, his views have not disappeared. He is recognized for having those views and therefore it is a valid concern to think that on his telephone there may be data pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she told the court.

The prosecutor added, His opinions – to which he is allowed – were not the focus for their attention on 28 July. It was his association to individuals who are possibly engaged in prohibited activities.”

Details of the Detention

The activist had arrived alone at the Eurotunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to a acquaintance and was traveling to the Spanish resort of Benidorm with more than £13,000 in a carry-on, the trial was told.

The funds was reportedly from a donation drive to cover costs from organizing a major rally that took place the day before in a London landmark.

Defense Arguments

Robinson, who disputes non-compliance with anti-terror laws during the incident on July 28 of the previous year, could receive up to 90 days in jail or a possible £2,500 penalty if convicted.

His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, said in final arguments that counter-terrorism police who stopped his client had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to evidence from police who said they called other organizations” after arresting Robinson, the defense lawyer said this was a reference to the security services and that no evidence had been offered from MI5 to indicate his client was a terrorist.

Williamson said the officers’ intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He stated that the main factor” on the choice to detain him was recognizing his identity”.

He noted that officers had used an special authority that must be properly policed” to try to discover details that was previously available. The barrister suggested that Robinson journeyed to Benidorm frequently, which ought to have reduced the officers’ concerns about him.

Legal Costs and Verdict Timing

Robinson claimed that his court expenses in the case were being paid for by Elon Musk, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has emerged as an ally of the campaigner and lately spoke at a gathering arranged by him in the capital via a online broadcast.

A proposed date of next Tuesday for the decision was changed by the district judge, the judge, after the defense said Robinson was due to be a invitee of the Israel's administration 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 Williamson.

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