Mr Justice Haddon-Cave : INTRODUCTION 1. The Claimant, Shakeel Begg, the Chief Imam at Lewisham Islamic Centre, claims damages against the Defendant (“the BBC”) for libel in respect of a broadcast of the “Sunday Politics” current affairs television programme on BBC1 on the morning of 3rd November 2013. 2. The Sunday Politics programme was hosted by the well-known journalist and broadcaster, Andrew Neil. It lasted an hour and was watched by over 838,000 people. It was subsequently viewed on iPlayer and YouTube. The programme opened with a roving reporter posing the question “Are mosques doing enough to counter extremism?”. The broadcast then switched to the studio where Mr Neil interviewed an invited studio guest from the Muslim Council of Britain, particularly on the subject of the treatment of women under Islam. Words complained of 3. The Claimant complains of the following words spoken by Mr Neil mid-way during that interview: “The East London Mosque, which you personally and the MCB closely associated with, it’s also the venue for a number of extremist speakers and speakers who espouse extremist positions. This year Shakeel Begg, he spoke there and hailed jihad as “the greatest of deeds”. In 2009 the mosque hosted a video presentation by somebody described by US security as an Al-Quaeda supporter. You had another speaker there who in the past had described Christians and Jews as “filth”. You’ve had a jihadist supporter of the Taliban there. Why do you do nothing to stop extremism, extremists like that, at this mosque with which you’re associated with.” 4. The Claimant said that he came to learn of what had been said about him on the “Sunday Politics” programme from third parties and felt upset at having been portrayed in this way. 5. He subsequently brought a complaint under the BBC complaints procedure. On 1 st April 2014, the BBC’s Editorial Complaints Unit wrote to the Claimant indicating that it was minded to uphold the Claimant’s complaint. However, on 30 th July 2014, the BBC’s Editorial Complaints Unit wrote again saying that it was taking the unusual step of withdrawing its ruling following research on the Web which revealed a previous speech and open letter attributed to the Claimant. It is common ground that the ruling of the BBC’s Editorial Complaints Unit, and its withdrawal, are irrelevant on the issue of liability but may be material to damages if that issue arises. The Court will decide the issues in question entirely afresh. BBC’s plea of justification 6. The BBC admits the words complained of (“WCO”) were broadcast, admits they are prima facie defamatory, but pleads justification, i.e. that they are substantially true. 2