ICFAI UNIVERSITY

DEHRADUN (ILS)
SUBJECT: LH:515- Right to
information

TOPIC: Right to be forgotten: Obliterated.

PRESENTED BY- SEEMA RAHMAN

ROLL NO.- 18FLICDDN01107
COURSE:- BBA LLB (Hons), 2018-2023
PRESENTED BEFORE - Ms PRIYA CHANANA ma'am
 CONTENTS
Introduction.
Origin and Evolution.
RTBF in India and need.
Challenges associated with RTBF.
Pros and cons of right to be forgotten.
Significant judicial decisions on RTBF.
RTBF is subject to certain restrictions.
Conclusion
 INTRODUCTION
 The right to be forgotten is a principle enshrined in the European Union’s General Data
Protection Regulation (GDPR) that gives individuals the right to have their personal
data erased under certain circumstances.
 There is no specific law in India that recognizes the right to be forgotten. However, the
right to privacy is a fundamental right under the Constitution of India. The right to
privacy implicitly includes the right to be forgotten.
 The right to be forgotten is not directly related to RTI. However, the right to be
forgotten may be indirectly related to RTI if the information requested is no longer
considered relevant or if the information is considered to be harmful to the individual’s
reputation.
 The ‘Right to be forgotten’ gives the right to individuals to have their private
information removed from the internet, websites or any other public platforms under
special circumstances.
 The ‘Right to be forgotten’ is also called the ‘Right to erasure’. ‘Right to be forgotten’
was first established by the European Union in May 2014. In India, currently there is no
law that specifically provides the ‘Right to be forgotten’. However, a bill is already
pending before the parliament.
 Humans are considered to be autonomous beings with an instinct that needs to
have control and confidentiality on certain aspects of their life. As we are in an
era where our data are on the internet or in public forums. So, it is most
important for everyone to secure it. For this purpose, many countries have
already come forward to make laws on data protection, and after the European
Union introduced GDPR this issue became the limelight of the world.
 In India, the discussion on data protection and privacy came into context in the
case of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India where the Supreme Court
recognized the Right to privacy as a fundamental right. The need for dedicated
legislation on data protection and privacy was also stated by Standing and
Parliamentary Committees in their Reports.
 A new data protection bill was introduced in May 2018 which was drafted by
Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee. The proposed bill delves into the
conception of a relatively new right, which aims to protect personal data, i.e. the
‘Right to be forgotten’. However, on December 11, 2019, Ravi Shankar Prasad,
the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, introduced The
Personal Data Protection Bill to the Lok Sabha. This Bill is not yet passed in
Parliament. Recently government withdrawn this bill after a parliamentary joint
committee suggested 81 amendments in the bill of 99 sections.
 The issue of manipulation of individuals information is seen in the case of Jorawar
Singh Mundy vs Union of India the Hon’ble Court held in this vide judgement and
directed the respondents (Google, Lex.in and Indian kanoon) to remove the judgment
till the further order.
 In the absence of a data protection regulation that restricts the fundamental Right
to delete useless and defamatory private data from the online space, the ‘Right to
be forgotten’ has attracted significant attention in India. So by this case it is clear
that it is need of the hour to consider the “’Right to be forgotten’ as a fundamental
Right”.
 Origin and Evolution
 The origin of this Right can be traced back to the French jurisprudence on the ‘Right to
oblivion’ or Droit a loubli in 2010. This Right of oblivion aided convicted criminals, who
had completed their imprisonment terms, by removing the publication of particulars of their
crimes and their criminal life.
 In 1998, Mario Costeja Gonz´lez, a Spaniard, had run into financial difficulties and was
in severe need of funds. As a result, he advertised a property for auction in the newspaper,
and the advertisement ended up on the internet by chance. Mr. Gonz´, unfortunately, was
not forgotten by the internet. And inconsequence news about the sale was searchable on
Google long after he had fixed his financial issue, and everyone looking him up assumed he
was bankrupt. Understandably, this resulted in severe damage to his reputation, prompting
him to take up the matter to the court. Ultimately, this case gave birth to the concept of the
‘Right to be forgotten’
 The European Court of Justice held against the giant search engine Google, stating that
under certain circumstances, the people of European Union could have personal
information removed from search results and public records databases.
 However, in 2019 the European Union court limited the ruling only to the European Union,
saying Google does not have to apply the ‘Right to be forgotten’ outside and abroad the
Europe.
 RTBF in India & Need
In India, RTBF doesn’t have legislative sanction yet. However, in the Puttaswamy
judgment, the Supreme court held that the right to privacy is a fundamental right.
In the Puttaswamy judgment, the Supreme Court observed that the “right of an
individual to exercise control over his personal data and to be able to control
his/her own life would also encompass his right to control his existence on the
Internet”.
Currently, many High courts have expressly recognized the right to be forgotten in
their judgments, taking note of international jurisprudence on this right.
With deeper integration of technology and the digitization of data, a simple Google
search can yield a plethora of information about an individual, which may hurt a
person’s reputation & dignity guaranteed under Article 21 of the constitution.
 At a time when the judiciary is entering Phase III of its ambitious e-Courts
project, rights such as RTBF will have to be coded into any technology
solution that is developed for judicial data storage and management
 Challenges Associated With Right to Be Forgotten

 Legal Challenge: Right to be forgotten may get into conflict with matters
involving public records.
 For instance, judgments have always been treated as public records and fall
within the definition of a public document according to Section 74 of the
Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
• According to a report by Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, RTBF cannot be
extended to official public records, especially judicial records as that would
undermine public faith in the judicial system in the long run.
• Information in the Public Domain is Like Toothpaste: Like once
toothpaste is out of the tube one can’t get it back in and once the
information is in the public domain, in the digital era, it will never go away.
 Individual vs Society: Right to be forgotten creates a dilemma between the
right to privacy of individuals and the right to information of society and
freedom of press.
Making Privacy as Reasonable Restriction: In order to implement the right to
be forgotten, privacy needs to be added as a ground for reasonable restriction
under Article 19 (2) by a major amendment to the Constitution.
 Balancing Privacy & Information: There is need for development of
framework, the right to be forgotten can be restricted. For example:
 In exercising the right of freedom of expression and information;
 Compliance with legal obligations;
 The performance of a task carried out in public interest, or public health;
 Archiving purposes in the public interest;
 Scientific or historical research purposes or statistical purposes; or
• The establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims.
 Pros and Cons of Right to be Forgotten
Although right to be forgotten is an inalienable right that protects a reputation of an
individual, proponents of free speech argue that should it be implemented outside the
European Union, it can be used as a tool for censorship.
Authoritarian governments can use this to remove information that puts them under
a bad light or puts information out there which they wouldn’t otherwise put out in the
public domain.

Pros:
An individual can control what information anyone sees.
RTBF can remove slanderous, libelous information form the net.
Can remove illegally uploaded content by a third party.
An opportunity for a fresh start.
• Details that are a threat to personal and financial security can be removed.
 Cons:
 The individual’s need for privacy may be overridden by the public’s overall
interest in viewing and accessing information.
 It places potential restriction on the freedom afforded to media, journalist and
other parties.
 RTBF is a broad and underdeveloped concept without any precedent.
 Google and other search engines may be backed up with requests to remove
information, so it may not be removed immediately.
• Lack of transparency surrounding important information about businesses or
persons.
 Significant Judicial Decision on ‘Right to
be forgotten’.
 In Sredharan T v. State Of Kerala, Civil The Kerala High Court in this case
recognized the ‘Right to be forgotten’ as a part of the Right to privacy. In this
case, a writ petition was filed for protection of the Right to privacy under Art.21
of the constitution and petitioner was seeking directions from the court for the
removal of the name and personal information of the rape victim from the
search engines in order to protect her identity. The court held in favors of the
petitioners recognizing the ‘Right to be forgotten’ and issued an interim order
directing the search engine to remove the name of the petitioner from orders
posted on its website until further orders were issued.
 In Subranshu Raot v. State of Odisha, the Orissa High Court examined the
‘Right to be forgotten’ as a remedy for the victims of sexually explicit videos or
photos often posted on social media for harassing the victims.
 In the Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan v Quintillion Business Media Pvt. Ltd, the Delhi
High Court supported an individual’s ‘Right to be forgotten’. In that instance,
Plaintiff petitioned the Hon’ble Court for a permanent injunction against the
Defendants, who had authored two articles against Plaintiff based on harassment
accusations they claimed to have received, as part of the #MeToo campaign. Even
though the Defendants agreed to remove the news stories, they were reprinted by
other websites in the meantime. The Court noted the Plaintiff’s Right to privacy,
of which the ‘’Right to be forgotten’’ and the ‘Right to be Left Alone’ are inbuilt
aspects, and guided that any republishing of the content of the originally disputed
articles, or any abstract therefrom, as well as altered forms thereof, on any print
or digital/electronic platform be held back during the pendency of the current
suit.
 So from above judicial pronouncement it is quite clear that Judiciary has at
some extent considered the ‘Right to be forgotten’ as a fundamental right and it
also recognized it a inherent part of privacy which is linked with article 21 of
Indian constitution the RTBF is a evolving fundamental right in India.
 RTBF is subject to certain restrictions
 The Supreme Court had stated that the ‘Right to be forgotten’ was subject to
certain restrictions and that it could not be used if the material in question was
required for the-
 Exercise of the Right to freedom of expression and information;
 Fulfillment of legal responsibilities;
 Execution of a duty in the public interest or public health;
 Protection of information in the public interest;
 For the purpose of scientific or historical study, or for statistical purposes; or
• The establishment, executing, or defending of legal claims.
 Conclusion
Right to be forgotten’ is an evolving right in India. Although this fundamental Right is
overlapping with some of the other fundamental Rights as discussed above but this is
also a very important Right in present modern era. Everyone has not good time always
sometimes some mistakes happen, and a stain emerged on their character however
after sometime when the accused acquitted then no one accept him as earlier. So, there
should be ‘Right to be forgotten’ so that in future no one could question upon his
dignity
THANK YOU
@SEEMA RAHMAN