MR JUSTICE JOHNSON Approved Judgment Hegab v Spectator Mr Justice Johnson: 1. The claimant seeks damages in libel and under the Data Protection Act 2018 in respect of an article written by the second defendant and published by the first defendant. The article (see paragraph 33 below) said the claimant was a street agitator who, in the context of disturbances “between local Muslims and Hindus”, whipped up his followers and made disparaging comments about Hindus. 2. An important part of the second defendant’s basis for what he wrote is a video of a speech given by the claimant in Leicester to a large group of (largely masked) men. In the course of that speech he said, “if they believe in reincarnation… what a humiliation and pathetic thing for them to be reincarnated into some pathetic weak cowardly people like that. I’d rather be an animal. I’d rather be reincarnated as a grasshopper…” (see paragraph 31 below). The claimant says it is clear from the context that he was not talking about Hindus, but the Hindutva. He says that the article fundamentally distorted what he said, that it is thereby untrue, that it is defamatory of him, and that despite him repeatedly pointing that out it has not been withdrawn. There is a dispute between the parties as to the meaning of the article, including whether it identifies the claimant, but, if it does, it is common ground that the article is defamatory of the claimant at common law. The defendants accept that the claimant used the word “Hindutva” and not “Hindus”, but they maintain that the meaning conveyed by the article is substantially true. They deny that the claimant has suffered serious harm. The factual background 3. There is extensive documentary evidence as to the general background, largely drawn from contemporaneous social media posts. The hearing bundle extends to 3,000 pages. There are approximately 45 hours of videos of events that are said to be relevant. There is considerable common ground about the basic facts. The Hindutva 4. The claimant defines Hindutva as “an extremist far-right ethno-nationalist political ideology” which is “exclusionary and hostile to Muslims” and also Sikhs and Christians. It promotes conspiracy theories, including that Muslim men conspire to convert Hindu women to Islam by luring them into marriage. The claimant refers to those who adhere to this ideology as “the Hindutva”. The defendants did not dispute the existence of such an ideology, or that “the Hindutva” could be used to refer to those that subscribe to it. There is, however, a stark dispute between the parties as to the role, if any, of the Hindutva in the disturbances that took place in Leicester in the summer of 2022, and also whether, in his speech, the claimant was really referring to the Hindutva, as opposed to Hindu men irrespective of their political views. Golders Green: Saturday 22 May 2021 5. On 22 May 2021, the claimant went to Golders Green with Ali Dawah and two camera operators. Mr Dawah subsequently uploaded a video to his YouTube channel, entitled “Muslims confront radical Israelis”. The video shows the claimant and Mr Dawah standing on a pavement. There are Jewish children a short distance away. The claimant and Mr Dawah are standing next to a van. On the side of the van is a large