Tommy Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, should have his 18-month prison sentence reduced due to the detrimental effect his segregation in custody is having on his mental health, the Court of Appeal has been told.
Robinson was jailed for contempt of court in October last year after admitting to breaching a High Court order. The order, issued in 2021, prohibited Robinson from repeating false claims about Syrian refugee Jamal Hijazi, who successfully sued him for libel. Robinson’s breaches, which involved publishing and promoting defamatory content, ultimately led to the sentence.
On Friday, Robinson’s legal team presented an appeal to reduce the sentence, arguing that his isolation while in prison is exacerbating his mental health issues. His barrister, Alisdair Williamson KC, told the court that Robinson suffers from ADHD and complex post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). He argued that the combination of these conditions and Robinson’s segregation has caused a “demonstrable effect” on his well-being, making him “ill.”
Robinson, who appeared in court via videolink from HMP Woodhill, near Milton Keynes, has been held in isolation for his safety. However, his legal team claims that this has led to a significant deterioration in his mental health. Williamson pointed out that Mr Justice Johnson, who initially handed down the sentence, had acknowledged the potential for a negative impact on Robinson’s mental health but did not have access to all the information at that time.
Williamson explained: “Mr Justice Johnson acknowledged that… there could be an effect on Mr Yaxley-Lennon’s mental health, and along with other factors, he reduced the sentence he was going to impose by one-sixth, four months. But he did not have before him this additional factor, which in itself means that the conditions Mr Yaxley-Lennon faces are more onerous.”
The appeal argues that although Robinson is kept safe in segregation, the very conditions designed to protect him are making his mental health worse. His legal team is seeking to reduce the sentence to reflect the impact these conditions are having on him.
The Solicitor General, who opposes the appeal, made it clear that the original sentence was appropriate. Robinson’s legal troubles began when the Solicitor General issued two contempt claims against him last year, following his breaches of the injunction. The first involved Robinson publishing a film titled Silenced in May 2023, which repeated false allegations about Jamal Hijazi. The second claim involved Robinson’s actions during a demonstration in Trafalgar Square in August 2023, where he once again circulated the defamatory film.
In his written submission, Aidan Eardley KC, representing the Solicitor General, argued that the sentence had both a punitive and coercive element. The punitive element, he said, was necessary due to Robinson’s flagrant disregard for the court order, while the coercive element was meant to encourage compliance. Eardley stated that Robinson’s continued breaches of the order and his refusal to show commitment to complying with the injunction should not lead to a reduction in his sentence.
More Read
Furthermore, Eardley argued that the prison conditions Robinson is subjected to were foreseeable and that there was no legal basis for an appeal based on the effect of his isolation. He pointed out that Robinson’s isolation, though harsh, was anticipated by the judge and accounted for in the original sentence.
The court also heard that Robinson had access to a television while in segregation but was dissatisfied with the programming available, reportedly complaining that he could not watch GB News. Robinson also made headlines during the hearing when he held up a sign to the camera claiming that a statement from the governor of HMP Woodhill was a “lie.” However, the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr dismissed this as irrelevant, saying, “We will ignore that, thank you very much indeed.”
Robinson’s legal troubles stem from a 2018 incident involving Jamal Hijazi, a schoolboy who was attacked at Almondbury Community School in Huddersfield, West Yorkshire. After a video of the incident went viral, Robinson made false claims on social media, accusing Hijazi of attacking girls. The claims led to the libel case in which Robinson was ordered to pay Hijazi £100,000 in damages, as well as legal costs, and was issued the injunction preventing him from repeating the false allegations.
The Court of Appeal is expected to deliver its ruling at a later date, with the panel consisting of Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, Lord Justice Edis, and Lord Justice Warby. In the meantime, Robinson’s supporters await the outcome of his appeal, which could see his sentence reduced due to the mental health impact of his solitary confinement.
