Explained | Right to be forgotten: govt position, court rulings, and laws elsewhere

News: Recently, the Centre told the Delhi High Court that the “right to be forgotten” is part of the fundamental right to privacy, but added it has no significant role to play in the matter.

While the right is not recognised by law in India, courts in recent months have held it to be an intrinsic part of the right to privacy. Petitions across courts have been seeking enforcement of this right, but it is not yet backed by statute in India.

Do other countries have such laws?

The European Union in 2018 adopted the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 17 of which provides for the right to erasure of certain categories of personal data.

Russia in 2015 enacted a law that allows users to force a search engine to remove links to personal information on grounds of irrelevancy, inaccuracy and violation of law.

The right to be forgotten is also recognised to some extent in Turkey and Siberia, while courts in Spain and England have ruled on the subject.

What is the position in India?

In a brief reply to one of the petitions recently, the Centre told the Delhi High Court that the right to privacy has been recognised as a fundamental right in the K S Puttaswamy judgment (2017) and that the ‘right to be forgotten’ is evolving in India.

The government said the Personal Data Protection Bill (a Joint Parliamentary Committee’s report on which was tabled on December 16), contains provisions to the doctrine of the ‘right to be forgotten’.

What is the opinion of the courts on this issue?

In May 2019, Justice Pratibha M Singh of the Delhi High Court, dealing with a case said that: The right to be forgotten and right to be left alone are inherent aspects of the right to privacy, and restrained republication of these news reports.

In April 2021, the Delhi High Court directed removal of a judgment from search results; the order is now being opposed by Google.

In January 2017, the Karnataka High Court ordered its registry to ensure that any Internet search engine does not reflect a woman’s name in an order passed in 2015.

In November 2020, the Orissa High Court, ruling in a case relating to videos uploaded on Facebook by a rape accused, stated that: Allowing such objectionable photos and videos to remain on a social media platform, without the consent of a woman, is a direct affront (offence) on a woman’s modesty and, more importantly, her right to privacy. It did not, however, pass an order on removal of the videos.

Source: This post is based on the article “Explained | Right to be forgotten: govt position, court rulings, and laws elsewhere” published in The Indian Express on 27^th Dec 2021.