Tommy Robinson, currently held at HMP Woodhill, is appealing his 18-month sentence for contempt of court at the Royal Courts of Justice.

Having served five months in solitary confinement—a measure unprecedented for a civil offender—his case raises significant questions. The judge acknowledged that Robinson’s actions caused no direct harm or injury, yet he remains isolated in a block of 16 empty cells, with no interaction with other inmates.

This isolation contrasts sharply with the government’s early release of criminal prisoners due to overcrowded prisons, highlighting an apparent inconsistency in policy.
Adding to the peculiarity, Robinson’s new “job” within the prison requires an additional eight cells on a separate block to remain vacant, bringing the total to 25 unoccupied cells solely to accommodate his detention. This arrangement is unique, as no criminal at Woodhill has been subjected to such prolonged isolation.

Critics argue this raises ethical concerns, particularly given reports of his deteriorating mental health and the extreme isolation he endures, conditions not imposed on others convicted of more serious offenses.

The situation fuels debate about fairness and prison resource allocation. While criminals convicted of violent crimes are released early to ease overcrowding, Robinson, a civil offender, remains confined under unusually restrictive measures.

His appeal could hinge on these disparities—whether the punishment fits the offense and whether his treatment aligns with justice, especially when the prison system claims capacity issues yet reserves significant space to keep him detained.