Authored By: Simranpreet kaur Nagra
Rimt University
INTRODUCTION
In this contemporary era, the technology has been advanced and is changing day by day. It has made data availability online very easy. The internet has completely changed the way in which data is created, stored and accessed. The digital platform has made information accessible easily but it also affects lives of peoples as individuals feel difficult to escape their past. Personal information, news reports or criminal accusations effects a lot to individuals as due to their past job opportunities are decreased , everyone treat them differently , they have to face unfairness and it made them difficult to move forward in their life . these issues has increased significantly which lead to demand for recognition of the Right to be Forgotten (RTBF), which allows individuals to request that their information be removed or de-indexed from the internet when it is no longer necessary .
In India, right to be forgotten (RTBF) has become debate in constitutional dilemma. The right to privacy is recognised as fundamental right under Article 21 [1]of the constitution. On the other hand, right to freedom of speech includes individuals getting information has been guarantees under Article 19 (1) (a)[2]. This article argues that India should recognize Right to be forgotten but to a limited extend not violating Right to Privacy or Right to freedom of speech or judicial transparency or the public interest.
EVOLUTION AND GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE RIGHT TO BE FORGOTTEN
The Right to be Forgotten (RTBF) allows individuals to request that their information be removed or de-indexed from the internet when it is no longer necessary .
The concept of RTBF has evolved with advancement in technology and usage of Internet. In early privacy concept (1890) the foundation of principal law was laid down by Samuel D. Warren and Louis D. Brandeis. In their article The Right to Privacy, they mentioned privacy as the right to be let alone.[3]
In digital era with advancement in technology and usage of internet information about an individual is easily accessible over internet , which may be outdated , irrelevant or inaccurate , but it effects individuals as it reduce job opportunities , personal relationships , reputation of a person and so on and effect social life of a person.
The right to be forgotten got recognised first time in Europe in landmark case of Mario Costeja Gonzalez v. Google Spain (2014)[4], in this case Mario Costeja Gonzalez requested google to remove past news report regarding their financial condition and google refused but later the Court of Justice of the European Union held that the irrelevant, or inaccurate or outdated information should be removed for search engines which has become foundation of right to be forgotten.
Later, Article 17 of General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)[5] enforced on 25 may, 2018 which recognised the right to erase or right to be forgotten which means an individual can request to delete their personal data that is no longer needed, or posted without consent of individual and so on , the individual can object and can request to remove information .
LEGAL FRAMEWORKS IN INDIA
The right to be forgotten lies in right to privacy and right to freedom of speech. The right to privacy is recognised as fundamental right under Article 21 [6]of the constitution. In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017)[7] , the supreme court held that right to privacy is intrinsic part of right to live and personal liberty under Article 21. On the other hand, right to freedom of speech includes individuals getting information has been guarantees under Article 19 (1) (a)[8]. This article argues that India should recognize Right to be forgotten but to a limited extend not violating Right to Privacy or Right to freedom of speech.
Article 17 of General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) enforced on 25 may, 2018 which recognised the right to erase or right to be forgotten which means an individual can request to delete their personal data that is no longer needed, or posted without consent of individual and so on , the individual can object and can request to remove information .
CRITICAL ANALYSIS
Meanwhile there are a lot of advantages of Right to be Forgotten as it gives chances to people to improve them and get better life by moving forward in life through removal of unnecessary, irrelevant, inaccurate and outdated information from search engines but it will effect journalists as they will be unable to get personal information regarding individuals for their journals and so on and it will effect journalists works and it will also affect right of freedom to speech.
There should be a balanced approach not violating right to privacy and right to freedom of speech for right to be forgotten that provides information but also not effecting individuals’ privacy.
CONCLUSION
The right to be forgotten has a significant aspect of digital privacy in response to the permanent nature of online information and the widespread use of the internet. With the advancement of technology and the internet worldwide, information has become easily accessible and stored, which affects individual lives due to unrelated or inaccurate information available on the internet. This affects individuals in various ways, such as impacting job opportunities, relationships, and so on.
The European Union has provided statutory recognition to this right under Article 17 of the GDPR. India continues to develop this concept primarily through constitutional jurisprudence and judicial decisions.
Under Article 17 of the GDPR, the right to be forgotten, also known as the right to erasure, gives a person the right to remove inaccurate, unrelated, or outdated information regarding them, or information that is no longer needed.
In my view, a balanced approach should be adopted so that people’s right to privacy and the right to freedom of expression are both protected, and the right to be forgotten does not violate the right to freedom of expression.
Reference(S):
[1] Constitution of India 1950, art 21.
[2] Constitution of India 1950, art 19(1)(a).
[3] Samuel D Warren and Louis D Brandeis, ‘The Right to Privacy’ (1890) 4 Harvard Law Review 193.
[4] Google Spain SL and Google Inc v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD) and Mario Costeja González (C-131/12) EU:C:2014:317.
[5] Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 (General Data Protection Regulation) [2016] OJ L119/1, art 17.
[6] Constitution of India 1950, art 21.
[7] Justice KS Puttaswamy (Retd) v Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1.
[8] Constitution of India 1950, art 19(1)(a).
