The British court has made its decision: Tommy Robinson has been freed on bail.
This is a time for celebration, but it’s not a complete victory. The judges ruled that procedural rules had been violated in Tommy’s wham-bam-thank-you-ma’am trial and imprisonment on May 25. So he has been released on bail pending a new trial on the same charges (whatever those were). His next court appearance will be in October. It will be interesting to see what he says in public (if anything) in the two months between now and then.
This must be a tremendous relief for his wife and kids, and I’ll bet he’s glad to be home.
Below are excerpts from the report in the Grauniad:
Tommy Robinson freed on bail as court orders retrial
Appeal court quashes finding of contempt against English Defence League founder
Tommy Robinson, the founder of the English Defence League, is to be freed from prison after the court of appeal ordered that he should be retried on a contempt of court charge.
He has been held at Onley jail near Rugby after receiving a 13-month sentence for breaches of reporting restrictions at Leeds and Canterbury crown courts.
At the court of appeal on Wednesday, the lord chief justice, Lord Burnett of Maldon, upheld the Canterbury conviction but said the ruling in Leeds was “flawed” and there should be a retrial.
Robinson, the appeal court said, would be released on bail on condition that he attended the retrial before the recorder of London at a date to be fixed and keep a distance of at least 400 metres from Leeds crown court.
In the ruling, the lord chief justice quashed the Leeds finding of contempt. That court hearing should not have proceeded immediately but waited to hear the case on a “fully informed basis”, he said.
The judgment added: “It was unclear what conduct was said to comprise a breach of that order and the appellant was sentenced on the basis of conduct which fell outside the scope of that order.
“… The decision at Leeds crown court to proceed to committal to prison so promptly and without due regard for [part] of the rules gave rise to unfairness.
“… The judge might have referred the matter to the attorney general to consider whether to institute proceedings. That course would have avoided the risk of sacrificing fairness on the altar of celerity.”
Robinson’s supporters in the packed courtroom broke into applause as Lord Burnett announced the decision. The judge called for silence while he read a summary of the judgment.
Outside the Royal Courts of Justice, supporters of Robinson and anti-racism protesters chanted rival slogans at each other separated by crowd barriers and police.
The London law firm Carson Kaye, which represented Robinson, thanked the court of appeal for its “detailed judgment”.
Its statement issued after the ruling on Wednesday, added: “The rule of law and the right to a fair hearing are fundamental to every individual and this ruling [is] an example of the procedural safeguards of the system. What makes the British system so unique is the ability to set aside personal feelings and deal with the law and each case on its merits.”
Outside the Royal Courts of Justice, Weyman Bennett, the joint national secretary of Stand Up To Racism, described the judgment as “mistaken”.
“We believe that it will encourage racists and Islamophobes to build and organise,” he said. “I believe if he was a black kid from Tottenham, where I’m from, he would still be in jail.”
Vince Crawthron, 70, a Royal Navy veteran, had travelled from Cwmbran in Wales to support Robinson. “Tommy has been unjustly imprisoned,” he said. “They want to silence him because he challenges the status quo.”
The Ukip leader, Gerard Batten — who spoke at a rally in support of Robinson in July — tweeted: “A word of appreciation for the Appeal Court today. They held up the best traditions of English law. Fair and impartial. But the conduct of the judge in the Leeds case needs looking at. That wasn’t fair or impartial.”