🔗 Share this article

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

Denial to Give Phone Pin

The far-right activist, using his real name is Tommy Robinson, allegedly declined to hand over his phone pin to police, stating it contained journalist content.” This occurred after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on 28 July 2024.

Prosecution Claims on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, state lawyer the prosecution argued that the anti-terror authorities employed by police are intended to allow information collection. She asserted that police had valid grounds to believe Robinson still have links to right-wing groups, even after the disbandment of the EDL organization.

“Although his membership of the English Defence League has come to an end, his beliefs have not gone away. He is recognized for having those views and therefore it is a reasonable suspicion to think that on his phone there could be information pertaining to acts of terrorism,” she told the court.

The prosecutor continued, 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 potentially engaged in prohibited activities.”

Circumstances of the Stop

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

The money was said to have been from a donation drive to cover expenses from organizing a large demonstration that occurred the previous day in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Arguments

Robinson, who denies failing to comply with counter-terrorism powers during the incident on July 28 of the previous year, faces up to three months in jail or a potential £2,500 penalty if found guilty.

His lawyer, defense counsel, argued in final arguments that anti-terror officers who stopped Robinson had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Referring to evidence from officers who stated they contacted “partner agencies” after detaining him, Williamson claimed this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been presented from the security service to suggest his defendant was a security threat.

He said the officers’ intervention was “discriminatory” because it was based to a large extent on a personal attribute.” He stated that the main factor” on the decision to detain him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He added that officers had used an special authority that needs to be properly policed” to try to discover details that was previously available. The barrister suggested that his client traveled to the resort frequently, which ought to have lessened the police suspicions about him.

Expenses and Verdict Timing

Robinson claimed that his legal costs in the proceedings were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the proprietor of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an supporter of the campaigner and recently addressed a gathering organized by him in London via a online broadcast.

A suggested day of next Tuesday for the decision was altered by the district judge, the judge, after the defense said Robinson was due to be a guest of the Israel's administration from Wednesday and would not return 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.

Goozee announced he would hand down his ruling on the start of 4 November.