Tommy Robinson’s visit to Dubai has attracted attention both because of the hugely entertaining and widely circulated confrontation with boxer Ty Mitchell, and because it appears so at odds with everything Robinson represents. But it could also place him in legal jeopardy in the Emirates.
Known internationally for his anti-Muslim activism, Robinson (real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon) has built a political identity around hostility to Islam and multiculturalism. His presence in the United Arab Emirates, a Muslim-majority state with some of the world’s most restrictive laws on religious insult and hate speech, raises uncomfortable questions for both Robinson and his hosts.
No protection
The UAE’s criminal law offers little room for ambiguity when it comes to religion. Insulting God, Islam or any of the other recognised faiths is a serious offence under the penal code, punishable by imprisonment and heavy fines. These provisions apply equally to citizens and visitors, and the authorities have repeatedly demonstrated that foreign nationality offers no protection.
In previous cases, British nationals have been jailed for comments made on social media platforms such as Facebook, even when those remarks were posted outside the Emirates.
Clear principle
The principle is clear: speech that denigrates religion can be prosecuted if it comes to the attention of the state while the speaker is present in the country.
Robinson’s long and well-documented history of anti-Islam rhetoric therefore represents a significant legal risk. From his leadership of the English Defence League to his online output over more than a decade, he has repeatedly framed Islam as a threat and Muslims as a hostile entity.
Under Emirati law, such material does not simply sit in the past. The UAE asserts jurisdiction over digital content regardless of where or when it was produced, meaning that an individual’s online archive can effectively travel with them.
Insults to religions criminal
That risk has increased further with the introduction of Federal Decree-Law No. 34 of 2023, which came into force shortly before Robinson’s reported arrival. This legislation dramatically expands the scope of offences relating to discrimination, hatred and extremism.
It criminalises insults to religions and prophets, bans the promotion of religious discrimination through any medium and sets out penalties ranging from months to years in prison, alongside fines that can reach into the millions of dirhams. The law is explicitly designed to cover digital expression, placing social media activity firmly within its reach.
Robinson’s presence has not gone unnoticed by residents and visitors alike. Public confrontations, including one involving professional boxer Ty MItchell at a Dubai sporting event, have highlighted the anger felt by those who see his visit as hypocritical and provocative.
Online petitions
Online campaigns calling for his removal from the country have gathered momentum, while activists and community figures have urged the authorities to examine whether his record is compatible with the UAE’s own laws and stated values.
This reaction exposes a deeper contradiction at the heart of the Emirati state’s self-presentation. In recent years the UAE has invested heavily in the language of tolerance, establishing a Ministry of Tolerance and promoting interfaith initiatives such as the Abrahamic Family House in Abu Dhabi.
Coexistence and moderation
These projects are designed to project an image of coexistence and moderation. Allowing a high-profile figure associated with anti-Muslim agitation to move freely within the country sits uneasily with that narrative, particularly when ordinary residents have faced detention or deportation for far less notorious conduct.
Past cases suggest that the law is not merely symbolic. Foreign nationals have been jailed, fined and expelled for speech deemed culturally or religiously offensive, often followed by blacklisting from re-entering the Gulf.
While enforcement can be selective and influenced by diplomatic considerations, Robinson’s notoriety cuts both ways. His profile increases international scrutiny but also creates pressure on the authorities to demonstrate that the law applies equally, regardless of publicity or political inconvenience.
Sharp contrast
The contrast with the legal environment Robinson is accustomed to in Britain could hardly be sharper. Blasphemy laws were abolished in the UK more than a decade ago, and hate speech prosecutions are generally confined to cases involving incitement to violence.
In the UAE, by contrast, the mere act of insulting a religion is a criminal offence, and the state claims broad authority over online expression. Deportation powers are extensive and exercised in the name of public interest rather than constrained by the kind of human rights framework that operates in Europe.
Zero tolerance
The UAE’s new anti-discrimination law was designed to send a message about zero tolerance for hatred. How it responds to a figure whose career has been built on precisely that kind of rhetoric will indicate how seriously those commitments are meant to be taken.
