CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 octobre 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Communicated on 13 October 2020 Published on 2 November 2020   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 32946/20 Salman BUTT against the United Kingdom lodged on 29 July 2020 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the gathering and processing, by the Extremism Analysis Unit (“EAU”) of the Home Office, of publicly-available data concerning the applicant’s allegedly extremist views and the EAU’s assessment based on those data that the applicant was an extremist. The data were originally gathered in the context of EAU research into extremism in universities. Information from the EAU formed the basis of a statement in a Government press release on tackling extremism in universities that, “Events included the hosting of 6 speakers that are on record as expressing views contrary to British values, including ... Dr Salman Butt ”. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been an interference with the applicant’s right to respect for his private life, within the meaning of Article   8   §   1 of the Convention?   2.     If so, was that interference justified under Article   8   §   2?