Legal framework, limits and standards for the application of the right to be forgotten: The experience of the European Union

Authors

  • Tigran D. Oganesian Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, 53/2, ul. Ostozhenka, Moscow, 119021, Russian Federation https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8239-694X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu14.2023.312

Abstract

The right to be forgotten is the right of individuals to exclude, restrict or delete links and personal information on the Internet. The article focuses on the legal basis of the realization of the right to be forgotten. In this regard, the provisions of the previously existing Directive 95/46/ EC, the new EU data protection regulation, as well as the case law of the EU Court of Justice are analyzed. It is noted that despite the fact that the Directive did not directly provide for this right, nevertheless, its provisions allowed the EU Court to derive the right to be forgotten through an evolutionary interpretation. The author analyzes the doctrinal positions according to which the realization of the right to be forgotten can lead to censorship of the Internet. It is noted that if competing rights are not properly balanced, the right to be forgotten can lead to unjustified censorship on the Internet. Particular attention is paid to the legal positions of the EU Court, which in 2014, in a ruling in the Google Spain case, for the first time internationally enshrined the right to be forgotten. The arguments revealing the significance of this resolution for the subsequent realization of this right are given. With regard to extraterritorial application, it is noted that the EU Court of Justice is striving for a global application of the right to be forgotten, allowing member States to adopt more extraterritorial protective mechanisms. It is noted that until a consistent practice is formed, the right to be forgotten will continue to remain an “unpredictable” right. In conclusion, the author points out that only time is an indicator of whether the right to be forgotten can become the most effective way to establish a balance between government agencies, Internet service providers and Internet users.

 

Keywords:

the right to be forgotten, data protection, privacy, Big Data, Internet

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
 

References

Библиография/References

Arthur, Charles. 2014. “Explaining the ‘right to be forgotten’ — the newest cultural shibboleth”. The Guardian. Accessed June 25, 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/14/explainer-right-tobe-forgotten-the-newest-cultural-shibboleth.

Bowcott, Owen. 2016. “France plans internet ombudsman to safeguard free speech”. The Guardian. Accessed June 25, 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/19/france-plans-internetombudsman-to-safeguard-free-speech.

Cameron, Fraser. 2010. “The European Union as a model for regional integration”. Council of Foreign Relations. Accessed June 25, 2023. https://www.cfr.org/report/european-union-model-regionalintegration.

Castellano, Simon P. 2012. “The right to be forgotten under European law: A constitutional debate(September 7, 2011)”. Lex Electronica 16 (1): 1–30.

Combemale, Chris. 2012. “New data protection regulation should reflect marketing needs”. The Guardian. Accessed June 25, 2023. http://www.theguardian.com/media-network/media-network-blog/2012/sep/24/data-protection-regulation-marketing-law.

Cowburn, Pam. 2019. “Google win in right to be forgotten case is victory for global freedom of expression”. ARTICLE 19. Accessed June 25, 2023. https://www.article19.org/resources/google-win-in-right-to-beforgotten-case-is-victory-for-global-freedom-of-expression.

Daskal, Jennifer. 2019. “Internet censorship could happen more than one way”. The Atlantic. Accessed June 25, 2023. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/09/europe-gives-internet-speechreprieve/598750.

Dowdell, John W. 2017. “An American right to be forgotten”. Tulsa Law Review 52 (2): 311–341.

Floridi, Luciano. 2012. “Technologies of the self ”. Philosophy & Technology 25: 307–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-012-0083-6

Greene, David. 2019. “European Court’s decision in right to be forgotten case is a win for free speech”. Electronic Frontier Foundation. Accessed June 25, 2023. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/09/european-courts-decision-right-be-forgotten-case-win-free-s.

Husovec, Martin. 2014. “Should we centralize the right to be forgotten clearing house?” Stanford Law School. The Centre for Internet and Society. Accessed June 25, 2023. https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2014/05/should-we-centralize-right-be-forgotten-clearing-house.

Jones, Meg Leta. 2016. Ctrl + Z: The right to be forgotten. New York, New York University Press.

Kulk, Stefan, Frederik Zuiderveen Borgesius. 2014. “Google Spain v. González: Did the court forget about freedom of expression?” European Journal of Risk Regulation 5 (3): 389–398.

Lawrence, Street, Mark Grant. 2000. Law of the Internet. Virginia, Lexis Law Publ.

Levesque, Jordan. 2016. “The right to be forgotten: No solution to the challenges of the digital environment”. LLM Thesis in Law, The University of British Columbia.

Mayer-Schönberger, Viktor, Yann Padova. 2016. “Regime change? Enabling big data through Europe’s New Data Protection Regulation”. Columbia Science and Technology Law Review 17: 315–335. https://doi.org/10.7916/stlr.v17i2.4007

Peers, Steve. 2014. “The CJEU’s Google Spain judgment: Failing to balance privacy and freedom of expression”. EU Law Analysis. Accessed June 25, 2023. http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-cjeus-google-spain-judgment-failing.html.

Pirkova, Eliska, Estelle Masse. 2019. “EU Court decides on two major “right to be forgotten” cases: There are no winners here”. Access Now. Accessed June 25, 2023. https://www.accessnow.org/eu-court-decideson-two-major-right-to-be-forgotten-cases-there-are-no-winners-here.

Reding, Viviane. 2012. “The EU data protection reform 2012: Making Europe the standard setter for modern data protection rules in the digital age”. Innovation Conference Digital, Life, Design, Munich. Accessed June 25, 2023. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/SPEECH_12_26.

Samonte, Mary. 2019. “Google v. CNIL Case C-507/17: The territorial scope of the right to be forgotten under EU law”. European Law Blog. Accessed June 25, 2023. https://europeanlawblog.eu/2019/10/29/google-v-cnil-case-c-507-17-the-territorial-scope-of-the-right-to-be-forgotten-under-eu-law/#_ftn1.

Stupariu, Ioana. 2015. “Defining the right to be forgotten. A comparative analysis between the EU and the US”. LLM Thesis in Law, Central European University.

Torop, Henry. 2018. “Õigus olla unustatud — kas rahvusvaheliselt tunnustatud inimõigus?” Avaliku õiguse osakond, Magistritöö, Tartu Ülikool.

Published

2023-09-28

How to Cite

Oganesian, T. D. (2023). Legal framework, limits and standards for the application of the right to be forgotten: The experience of the European Union. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Law, 14(3), 750–767. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu14.2023.312

Issue

Section

Foreign and International Law