Tommy Robinson Acquitted of Terror-related Charge After Phone PIN Dispute
UK far-right activist cleared as judge finds his stop was unlawful and linked to views rather than legitimate suspicion
A UK court has cleared British activist Tommy Robinson—whose legal name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon—of an offence under counter-terrorism laws after he refused to give the passcode to his phone following a stop at the Channel Tunnel in July 2024. The judge ruled that the detention was unlawful, concluding the decision to stop him was based on his political beliefs rather than evidence of terrorism.
Robinson, a vocal anti-Islam campaigner aged 42, was pulled aside by police at the Folkestone terminal as he drove a silver Bentley for Spain.
Officers claimed they became suspicious of his demeanour, last-minute ticket purchase and possession of cash, prompting them to invoke Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and request his phone PIN.
Robinson declined, citing journalistic privilege.
The prosecution insisted the stop was justified, arguing that officers had “reasonable suspicion” that the phone may contain material relevant to acts of terrorism due to Robinson’s known associations.
The judge, however, said he could not be satisfied the stop was lawful and pointed out the troubling fact that the interaction seemed motivated by Robinson’s protected beliefs rather than objective counter-terror criteria.
In public remarks outside court, Robinson thanked Elon Musk for funding his legal defence and cited the case as a victory for press freedom and political expression.
He said the ruling confirmed that he had been targeted because of his views rather than any credible security threat.
His supporters cheered the verdict, while opponents, who describe him as a far-right agitator with a criminal record, emphasised that the acquittal rests on the law’s procedural thresholds, not an endorsement of his activism.
The judgment raises broader questions about the use of border-stop powers under the Terrorism Act, and whether they can be applied without running into discrimination concerns.
The government’s counter-terrorism apparatus may now need to re-examine how Schedule 7 is deployed, especially when dealing with politically-active individuals.
Meanwhile, Robinson said he intends to continue his media and activism work, describing the ruling as a turning point.
Robinson, a vocal anti-Islam campaigner aged 42, was pulled aside by police at the Folkestone terminal as he drove a silver Bentley for Spain.
Officers claimed they became suspicious of his demeanour, last-minute ticket purchase and possession of cash, prompting them to invoke Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and request his phone PIN.
Robinson declined, citing journalistic privilege.
The prosecution insisted the stop was justified, arguing that officers had “reasonable suspicion” that the phone may contain material relevant to acts of terrorism due to Robinson’s known associations.
The judge, however, said he could not be satisfied the stop was lawful and pointed out the troubling fact that the interaction seemed motivated by Robinson’s protected beliefs rather than objective counter-terror criteria.
In public remarks outside court, Robinson thanked Elon Musk for funding his legal defence and cited the case as a victory for press freedom and political expression.
He said the ruling confirmed that he had been targeted because of his views rather than any credible security threat.
His supporters cheered the verdict, while opponents, who describe him as a far-right agitator with a criminal record, emphasised that the acquittal rests on the law’s procedural thresholds, not an endorsement of his activism.
The judgment raises broader questions about the use of border-stop powers under the Terrorism Act, and whether they can be applied without running into discrimination concerns.
The government’s counter-terrorism apparatus may now need to re-examine how Schedule 7 is deployed, especially when dealing with politically-active individuals.
Meanwhile, Robinson said he intends to continue his media and activism work, describing the ruling as a turning point.
