Tommy Robinson has claimed prison segregation is “making him ill” in a bid to reduce his 18-month jail term for repeating libellous allegations against a Syrian refugee.
The far-right activist, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, was jailed for contempt of court last October after he admitted to 10 breaches of a High Court order made in 2021.
The 42-year-old was accused of “thumbing his nose at the court” in front of millions of people in the “flagrant” breaches, including airing a documentary at a rally in Trafalgar Square last July.
Sentencing him at Woolwich Crown Court last year, Mr Justice Johnson said Robinson’s breaches were not “accidental, negligent or merely reckless” and that the “custodial threshold is amply crossed”.
Robinson had been barred from repeating false allegations against a refugee called Jamal Hijazi. Mr Hijazi successfully sued Robinson for libel after the then-schoolboy was assaulted at Almondbury Community School in Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, in October 2018.
However, defamatory allegations against the schoolboy were repeated in six podcast and YouTube interviews undertaken by Robinson since February 2023, including with Jordan Peterson.
A 90-minute documentary called Silenced, which “substantially repeats” the allegations was also published or aired on four occasions, including on Twitter/X – where it was viewed by 44 million people – and to crowds at a rally in Trafalgar Square in July 2024.
At one point the film was reshared by controversial far-right influencer Andrew Tate to 2.2 million followers.
The founder of the now-defunct English Defence League is currently set to be released on 26 July. However he appealed his sentence at the High Court on Friday, arguing his detention in prison segregation is impacting his mental health.
The Solicitor General opposes the appeal, which Robinson attended via videolink from HMP Woodhill in Milton Keynes.
Alisdair Williamson KC told the court that Robinson suffers from ADHD and "complex post-traumatic stress disorder", which, when combined with his segregation in prison, was having a "demonstrable effect" on him.
He said: "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 of itself means that the conditions that Mr Yaxley-Lennon faces are more onerous."
He continued: "He is being kept safe by the authorities in segregation, but being kept safe is making him ill, and more ill than Mr Justice Johnson could have foreseen on the basis of the information before him.
"We invite this court to interfere with that order to reduce the sentence imposed."
The appeal comes after he last month lost a legal challenge over his detention in solitary confinement due to threats against him in prison, claiming it was damaging his mental health.
The Ministry of Justice opposed his bid, telling the court his segregation was “substantively more permissive” than standard regimes, with access to a laptop and emails, several hours of daily exercise and four hours of social phone calls each day.
Tom Cross, representing the ministry, noted that 120 people had been authorised to visit Robinson, with more than 80 visits already conducted.
A judge dismissed his challenge, saying his case was “not arguable”.
In written submissions for the appeal hearing on Friday, Aidan Eardley KC, for the Solicitor General, said that Robinson's sentence involved a "punitive element" and a "coercive element".
The "coercive element" – four months – would be deducted from Robinson's sentence if he "were to demonstrate a commitment to comply with the injunction". However he said Robinson "remains defiantly in breach of the order" and was asking for the court's "indulgence".
He added there was "no evidence that the conditions in which the appellant is being held are more severe than was anticipated" by Mr Justice Johnson.
He said: "There are no grounds for altering the sentence in this case.
"(Mr Justice Johnson) was fully apprised of the risk that a further period of imprisonment in conditions restricting the appellant's ability to associate with other prisoners might have a detrimental impact on the appellant's mental health and determined the sentence accordingly."
Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, Lord Justice Edis and Lord Justice Warby will hand down their ruling at a later date.
