🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors informed the tribunal that law enforcement had reasonable suspicions that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's phone held material relevant to terrorist activities when they detained him in the previous year as he tried to leave the UK.

Refusal to Give Phone Pin

The far-right activist, whose legal name is Tommy Robinson, reportedly declined to provide his password to officers, stating it included journalist content.” This happened after he was intercepted at the Channel tunnel on July 28, 2024.

Trial Claims on Counter-Terrorism Powers

On the last day of the proceedings, state lawyer the prosecution argued that the counter-terrorism powers used by law enforcement are intended to permit intelligence gathering. She asserted that police had valid grounds to believe the defendant continued to have links to far-right activists, even after the disbandment of the EDL organization.

While his affiliation of the EDL has come to an end, 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 phone there could be data relevant to acts of terrorism,” she told the court.

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

Circumstances of the Detention

The activist had arrived by himself at the Channel tunnel in a silver Bentley belonging to 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 said to have been from a donation drive to cover costs from arranging a major rally that took place the day before in Trafalgar Square.

Legal Team Arguments

The defendant, who disputes failing to comply with anti-terror laws during the incident on 28 July of the previous year, could receive up to three months in prison or a possible £2,500 penalty if convicted.

His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, said in final arguments that anti-terror officers who detained his client had engaged in a speculative search” and that he had been unlawfully detained.

Citing testimony from officers who stated they called other organizations” after detaining him, Williamson claimed this was a allusion to the intelligence agencies and that lack of proof had been offered from MI5 to suggest his defendant was a terrorist.

Williamson said the officers’ action was biased” because it was based to a large extent on a protected characteristic.” He said that the “predominant influence” on the choice to stop him was “‘oh look, it’s Tommy Robinson”.

He added that police had used an “extraordinary power that needs to be carefully regulated” to try to discover information that was already known. The barrister suggested that his client traveled to Benidorm regularly, which ought to have lessened the officers’ concerns about him.

Expenses and Judgment Date

The activist stated that his court expenses in the case were being paid for by the tech billionaire, the owner of social media and electric car companies, who has appeared as an ally of the far-right activist and lately spoke at a rally organized by him in London via a online broadcast.

A suggested day of next Tuesday for the verdict was altered by the magistrate, the judge, after the defense said his client was scheduled to be a invitee of the Israeli government from the midweek and would not come back until October 25.

{“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 the barrister.

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