Abstract
This comment considers the Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights judgment in Catt v United Kingdom. This case concerned the applicant’s complaint regarding the collection and retention of personal data which included their political views on a police ‘domestic extremist’ database. The Chamber unanimously held that Article 8 had been violated taking into account the nature of the personal data, the age of the applicant and the fact they had no history or prospect of committing acts of violence. Whilst the Chamber found that the collection of personal data had been justified, its retention had not, particularly considering the lack of safeguards.