The Central Criminal Court has ruled that the October 2024 raid on journalist Asa Winstanley’s home by British counter-terrorism police was unlawful.

The court ordered the immediate return of all computers, phones and devices seized in the raid, after finding that the search warrants applied for by the police under section 8 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 used were “unlawfully issued.”

The dawn raid, which took place on 17 October 2024, was carried out under the pretext of investigating Asa’s social media posts. Despite never being arrested or charged, Winstanley was targeted with sweeping warrants that unlawfully granted police access to journalistic and legally privileged material.

The court firmly rejected the Metropolitan Police’s subsequent request for a production order, which would have allowed them to access Winstanley’s devices retroactively. The judge, Recorder of London Mark Lucraft KC, expressed being “very troubled by the way in which the search warrant application was drafted, approved and granted where items were to be seized from a journalist.”

Tayab Ali, solicitor for Asa Winstanley and partner at Bindmans, said:

This ruling is a resounding victory for press freedom and the rule of law. The actions of the police, raiding a journalist’s home under the guise of counter-terrorism, were not only unlawful but a grave threat to the democratic principle that journalists must be able to work without fear of state harassment.

The court recognised that the warrants were unlawfully obtained, the police conduct was unjustified, and their attempt to retrospectively legitimise the raid failed. This case was not about national security, it was about silencing a journalist who had made comments on the situation in Gaza.

The police acted improperly by applying for warrants at the Magistrates Court where there simply is no power to retain journalistic and privileged material and despite repeated warnings refused to concede they had acted unlawfully. The police should now urgently review why this happened and what policy decisions led to this unlawful violation on journalistic freedom

Winstanley’s legal team argued successfully that the devices seized contained legally privileged material from his work on the Undercover Policing Inquiry and sensitive journalistic data. The National Union of Journalists (NUJ) supported his case.

Asa was represented by Bindmans partner Tayab Ali and solicitor Kiya Mazur, and counsel Jude Bunting KC and Tayyiba Bajwa of Doughty Street Chambers.

The Metropolitan Police have yet to issue an apology or drop their ongoing investigation into Winstanley’s journalism.