In a momentous ruling that reverberates through the corridors of justice, far-right activist Tommy Robinson, born Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, has been sentenced to 18 months in prison for contempt of court, a stark reminder of the legal boundaries that govern freedom of expression. This decision emerges from a saga that began in 2018, entwining issues of free speech, misinformation, and the responsibility that comes with a platform.
The Woolwich Crown Court hearing revealed a troubling narrative that began when Robinson posted inflammatory and false claims against Jamal Hijazi, a Syrian teenager, following an incident at school that left Hijazi visibly shaken. In October 2018, a viral video captured the assault on Hijazi, igniting a wave of sympathy for the young refugee. However, Robinson, leveraging his influence over one million Facebook followers, responded with a damning video. He falsely branded Hijazi as a “violent thug,” igniting a firestorm of hatred against the teenager and his family, who were subsequently inundated with death threats.
Fast forward three years, and the High Court ruled in favor of Hijazi, awarding him £100,000 in damages after deeming Robinson’s statements defamatory. The court imposed an injunction prohibiting Robinson from repeating these allegations. Yet, Robinson’s contempt for this court order became evident as he brazenly disregarded the law, seemingly believing himself above it.
In February 2023, Robinson began to publicly repeat the falsehoods, asserting that he had been “silenced” by the state, with a film that reportedly garnered over 47 million views. His defiance culminated in a rally at London’s Trafalgar Square, where he defiantly stated he would not be silenced, demonstrating a blatant disregard for the judicial system. Following this public display of contempt, he fled the country, further complicating an already volatile situation.
Aidan Eardley KC, representing Solicitor General Sarah Sackman, highlighted the high culpability of Robinson’s actions, emphasizing the sheer volume of breaches—ten in total—that went against the High Court order. “This is a high culpability case because of the high number of breaches,” Eardley stated, underscoring that the material was still accessible online, and under Robinson’s control.
Defending Robinson, Sasha Wass KC argued that he operated under the guise of a journalist, deeply committed to the principle of free speech. “This defendant has been neither sly nor dishonest nor seeking gain for himself,” Wass contended, presenting him as a passionate advocate for freedom of expression. However, the court was not swayed by this defense, as Judge Mr. Justice Johnson recognized the seriousness of Robinson’s offenses.
As he delivered the sentence, Judge Johnson emphasized the importance of upholding the rule of law in a democratic society. “Nobody is above the law. Nobody can pick or choose which laws or which injunctions they obey,” he asserted, reinforcing the idea that all citizens must adhere to court orders, irrespective of their personal beliefs. The judge’s words resonated as a clear declaration that Robinson’s actions threatened the very foundations of justice.
The ramifications of this case extend beyond Robinson himself; they serve as a warning to others who might consider flouting legal boundaries in the name of free speech. The judge remarked that Robinson’s contempt was further aggravated because he repeated the false claims even after court proceedings had begun, reflecting a deliberate choice to undermine the court’s authority.
Robinson’s history with the law is extensive, having faced multiple contempt cases, which previously resulted in a suspended sentence and a six-month jail term. His recent conviction underscores a pattern of behavior that poses significant questions about accountability for public figures who spread misinformation.
In addition to his current sentence, Robinson faces further legal challenges, including charges related to failing to unlock his phone for police during a counter-terrorism stop. This impending court appearance in November adds another layer to his already tumultuous legal saga.
As the dust settles from this latest chapter in Tommy Robinson’s life, it leaves in its wake an essential discourse on the responsibilities that accompany freedom of expression. In a world where misinformation can spread like wildfire, the law must act decisively to protect the vulnerable from baseless allegations and unfounded hatred. This case serves as a critical juncture, reminding us that in the realm of public discourse, the truth must prevail, and the law must be respected. Robinson’s 18-month sentence stands as a testament to the idea that no one, regardless of their platform or beliefs, is above the law.