Tommy Robinson cannot claim remarks about Syrian refugee in Huddersfield bullying video were in public interest, High Court rules

A judge has ruled that Tommy Robinson has no basis for claiming comments made about a refugee who was filmed being attacked at a Huddersfield school were in the interests of the public.
Tommy Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, is being sued for damages by Jamal HijaziTommy Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, is being sued for damages by Jamal Hijazi
Tommy Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, is being sued for damages by Jamal Hijazi

The far-right figure is being sued for libel by Jamal Hijazi, who appeared in a clip posted online in November 2018 that showed him being pushed to the ground and threatened with drowning at Almondbury Community School.

The footage was shared thousands of times across different social media platforms and prompted outrage, with a GoFundMe page subsequently raising hundreds of thousands for Jamal's family.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, claimed Jamal, who was 16 at the time the video was circulated, was “not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school”.

He also claimed Jamal “beat a girl black and blue” and “threatened to stab” another boy at his school, allegations the teenager “emphatically denies”.

The teenager is bringing a libel claim against Robinson, who is relying on a defence of truth.

In June, the English Defence League founder applied to amend his defence to also argue that his remarks were made in the public interest.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

He claimed the video of the attack was published and a GoFundMe fundraising page set up to present a false image of Jamal for financial gain.

Robinson’s lawyers said Jamal “had a financial interest in misrepresenting the playing ground incident as one of the racist bullying of a refugee, in order to maximise his income from the GoFundMe page”, adding the teenager may have alternatively been used by others to raise the funds.

They also argued that no attempt had been made to obtain the side of the story from the then-15-year-old boy who pushed Jamal in the footage.

Robinson claimed to have contacted and met the boy, known as B, and met with three parents of children who had allegedly been physically assaulted – in one case bitten – and verbally abused by Jamal.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

He said it was in the public interest for B’s version of events to be publicised and to challenge the wider perception of the incident, as there was “far more to the story”.

But in a judgment handed down remotely on Monday, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected Robinson’s public interest application.

He said: “It is clear that (Robinson)‘s public interest defence relies principally in his reasonably believing there to be a public interest in setting the record straight, through him allowing B to put forward his answer to the proposition that the viral video demonstrated a racially motivated attack on the claimant.”

The judge said Robinson’s argument had not respected the difference between his “subjective belief” and objective truth.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Lawyers for Jamal argued the video of the attack was uploaded on November 27, with Robinson’s comments published on November 28 and 29 respectively, giving him limited time to conduct his alleged investigations.

The judge said there was a “complete absence of chronology” in when the interviews occurred, adding Robinson has still failed to provide the names of the people alleging Jamal had been violent to them.

Mr Justice Nicklin said: “In order to disclose a case with a real prospect of success, (Robinson) must make clear when the various interviews, and other steps upon which he places reliance, took place.”

He added “the door is not finally closed” to a public interest defence because if Robinson submits a more detailed application with a suitable explanation for the delay, it will be considered.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The judge accepted amendments to Robinson’s existing defence of truth, where the 37-year-old added further details to allegations of violence by Jamal as well as three new incidents, which will be tested at trial.

Support The Yorkshire Post and become a subscriber today. Your subscription will help us to continue to bring quality news to the people of Yorkshire. In return, you'll see fewer ads on site, get free access to our app and receive exclusive members-only offers. Click here to subscribe.