Tommy Robinson to be Charged Under Section Four

We reported yesterday that the criminal charge against English Defence League leader Tommy Robinson has been dropped. Mr. Robinson had been accused of assaulting a police officer when he grabbed the Black Flag of Jihad from one of the poppy-burning Muslim demonstrators on Remembrance Day.

The authorities seem to have realized that they would have been hard-pressed to gain a conviction under that charge. However, they have evidently not given up the idea of locking up Tommy Robinson, and have now decided to charge him under Section Four of the Public Order Act.

First, the news article:

Assault charge against EDL leader dropped

Prosecutors have dropped claims that Stephen Lennon [Tommy Robinson], the founder of the English Defence League, assaulted a police officer during clashes with Islamic protesters in London.

Lennon, 27, of Layham Drive, Luton, was due to go on trial at West London Magistrates’ Court. But the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said it had withdrawn the charge after new evidence emerged. However, a spokesman said Lennon will now face an offence under section four of the Public Order Act, but has yet to be charged. Lennon was arrested by Met Police officers in Kensington, west London, as the nation stopped to mark the anniversary of Armistice Day last year. He was among a group of EDL demonstrators which clashed with a militant Islamist group who burned poppies during the two-minute silence. One officer suffered a head injury that required hospital treatment during the clashes involving more than 50 people. Five others associated with his right-wing group were arrested and two Muslim protesters were held on suspicion of public order offences. Members of the Islamist group Muslims Against Crusades have vowed to “expose the enemies of Islam”.

Two men, aged 30 and 26, have since been charged with public order offences and are due to go on trial later this year. A hearing was due to take place on Wednesday to formally drop the charge of assaulting a police officer and adjourn the case to a date to be set. Mr Lennon is also known as Yaxley-Lennon and uses the pseudonym Tommy Robinson. Speaking after the charge of assaulting a police officer was dropped, Mr Lennon claimed more than 1,000 supporters had pledged to picket the court if the case went ahead.

He said the decision was made after EDL members found fresh video footage of the incident. Mr Lennon described the new potential charge as “out of a Christmas cracker” and said he would deny it. Speaking by telephone from Liverpool Street station, Mr Lennon said he was not due to attend the hearing. He said: “This is a joke, a farce. It completely shows they are trying to pin anything they can on me. I will plead not guilty to the public order. I was trying to prevent a crime of burning poppies. I was trying to do the police’s job because they failed to keep the rule of law on the streets of London.”…

Section Four is the same part of the Public Order Act under which Guramit Singh has been charged. As Nick reported a couple of weeks ago, the Act was amended after 9-11 to make sure that Muslims could be protected from “racially or religiously aggravated harassment”. This is presumably exactly the same law which will be used to prosecute Tommy Robinson.

To recap, here is Section 28 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, which defines ‘religiously aggravated’, and was later amended (emphasis added):

28		Meaning of “[racially or religiously aggravated]”.
		(1)		An offence is [racially or religiously aggravated] for the purposes of sections 29 to 32 below if—
				(a)		at the time of committing the offence, or immediately before or after doing so, the offender demonstrates towards the victim of the offence hostility based on the victim’s membership (or presumed membership) of a [racial or religious group]; or
				(b)		the offence is motivated (wholly or partly) by hostility towards members of a [racial or religious group] based on their membership of that group.
		(2)		In subsection (1)(a) above—
				“membership”, in relation to a [racial or religious group], includes association with members of that group; “presumed” means presumed by the offender.
		(3)		It is immaterial for the purposes of paragraph (a) or (b) of subsection (1) above whether or not the offender’s hostility is also based, to any extent, [on any other factor not mentioned in that paragraph.]
		(4)		In this section “racial group” means a group of persons defined by reference to race, colour, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins.
		[(5)		In this section “religious group” means a group of persons defined by reference to religious belief or lack of religious belief.]

Note that Section 28 sub-section (1) refers to Sections 29-32 of the Act. Section 31 deals with public order offences committed under the legislation:

31		[Racially or religiously aggravated] public order offences.
		(1)		A person is guilty of an offence under this section if he commits—
				(a)		an offence under section 4 of the Public Order Act 1986 (fear or provocation of violence);
				(b)		an offence under section 4A of that Act (intentional harassment, alarm or distress); or
				(c)		an offence under section 5 of that Act (harassment, alarm or distress), which is [racially or religiously aggravated] for the purposes of this section.

Here is Section 28 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 as it was originally enacted:

28		Meaning of “racially aggravated”
		(1)		An offence is racially aggravated for the purposes of sections 29 to 32 below if—
				(a)		at the time of committing the offence, or immediately before or after doing so, the offender demonstrates towards the victim of the offence hostility based on the victim’s membership (or presumed membership) of a racial group; or
				(b)		the offence is motivated (wholly or partly) by hostility towards members of a racial group based on their membership of that group.
		(2)		In subsection (1)(a) above—
				“membership”, in relation to a racial group, includes association with members of that group; “presumed” means presumed by the offender.
		(3)		It is immaterial for the purposes of paragraph (a) or (b) of subsection (1) above whether or not the offender’s hostility is also based, to any extent, on—
				(a)		the fact or presumption that any person or group of persons belongs to any religious group; or
				(b)		any other factor not mentioned in that paragraph.
		(4)		In this section “racial group” means a group of persons defined by reference to race, colour, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins.

Section 39 details the amendments (emphasis added):

39		Religiously aggravated offences
		(1)		Part 2 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (c. 37) is amended as set out in subsections (2) to (6).
		(2)		In the cross-heading preceding section 28 for “Racially-aggravated” substitute “ Racially or religiously aggravated”.
		(3)		In section 28 (meaning of racially aggravated)—
				(a)		in the sidenote and subsection (1) for “racially aggravated” substitute “ racially or religiously aggravated”;
				(b)		in subsections (1) and (2) for “racial group” substitute “ racial or religious group”;
				(c)		in subsection (3) for the words from “on” to the end of the subsection substitute “ on any other factor not mentioned in that paragraph.”
		(4)		In section 28 after subsection (4) insert—
				“(5) In this section “religious group” means a group of persons defined by reference to religious belief or lack of religious belief.”
		(5)		In each of the provisions listed in subsection (6)—
				(a)		in the sidenote for “Racially-aggravated” substitute “Racially or religiously aggravated”;
				(b)		in subsection (1) for “racially aggravated” substitute “ racially or religiously aggravated”.
		(6)		The provisions are—
				(a)		section 29 (assaults);
				(b)		section 30 (criminal damage);
				(c)		section 31 (public order offences);
				(d)		section 32 (harassment etc.).

I don’t have the ear of Tommy Robinson’s solicitor, but if I did, I would recommend that he build a defense based on the meaning of the Black Flag of Jihad. If anything is intended to cause “religious aggravation”, it is the battle flag of Mohammed, which announces war, suffering, and death to Christians, Sikhs, Jews, Hindus, and all other non-Muslims.

Tommy Robinson was acting to prevent religious aggravation when he took down that flag. I don’t know whether the defense team will buy it, but EDL readers may want to pass this idea on to Tommy Robinson.

It’s worth considering.


Hat tip: DF.