The highest court in the European Union, the European Court of Justice (ECJ), has recently passed a ruling allowing Google to not remove links related to sensitive personal data worldwide. According to European law, Google is not obligated to globally delete such information across its search engine versions, even if a specific state requests it.
A Background on the Case
The case between France and Google revolved around the removal of delicate data available worldwide on Google relating to a particular group of people. It tested whether individuals have the right to demand the elimination of their personal data from internet search results without infringing upon free speech and legitimate public interest. The court’s verdict limited the scope of an online privacy law known as the ‘right to be forgotten’, reducing people’s control over what information is accessible about them on the internet. It emphasized that finding a balance between privacy and free speech is crucial when deciding if websites should be delisted over the internet.
About the European Court of Justice (ECJ)
The ECJ was established in 1952 and is the highest court in matters of European Union law. Its main role, as outlined in Article 164 of the Treaty of Rome, is to ensure the consistent application and interpretation of EU law across all member states. Additionally, it ensures that countries and EU institutions comply with EU law. The Court of Justice of the European Union, seated in Luxembourg, consists of two courts: the Court of Justice and the General Court.
The Right to be Forgotten in Indian Context
The ‘Right to be Forgotten’ signifies an individual’s ability to limit, unlink, delete or amend the disclosure of personal information on the internet that is misleading, irrelevant or embarrassing. If requested, it allows for the legal removal of a person’s personal information. The ‘Right to be Forgotten’ differs from ‘Right to Privacy’ as it deals with removing previously public information and restricts third-party access. In India, neither the IT Act 2000 (amended in 2008) nor the IT Rules 2011 feature provisions regarding this right. The only mention is found in Section 27 of the draft Data Protection bill.
| Right to be Forgotten | Definition |
|---|---|
| Limit | The ability of the person to limit the disclosure of personal information |
| Delete | Lets individual request for legal removal of personal information on the internet |
| Correct | The right to amend misleading or irrelevant information |
| Unlink | The power to delink the past information that was publicly known |
Judicial Stand on ‘Right to be Forgotten’
In India, various high courts have upheld the right to be forgotten in certain cases. For example, the Karnataka High Court supported a woman’s right to be forgotten, in keeping with the trend in western countries. This right was especially important in sensitive cases involving women, including cases related to rape or those affecting an individual’s dignity and reputation. The Delhi High Court asked the Centre and Google whether the right to privacy encompassed the right to unlink irrelevant information from the Internet in another case.
The Way Forward
A balance must be found between the right to privacy and protection of personal data (as covered under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution), and free information on the internet (under Article 19). A comprehensive data protection law needs to address these issues and reduce conflict between these two fundamental rights. These rights form an integral part of the golden trinity (Articles 14, 19, and 21) of the Indian Constitution.