The right to be forgotten – the right of an individual to request the removal of links to “inadequate, irrelevant or excessive” information about them online – was put into force in the EU in 2014 (and previously in Argentina), in order to protect individuals from being “perpetually or periodically stigmatised as a consequence of a specific action performed in the past”.

EU, Icelandic, Lichtensteinian, Norwegian and Swiss citizens can request removal of links by completing a form through a search engine’s web site, after which it is assessed and – if approved – the links are removed from search results. If a search engine refuses a request, individuals can appeal to their national data protection agency. Once a link has been removed, the information remains online and could still be found using a non-EU based search engine.

For several years, the French data regulator – the Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertes (CNIL) – has sought to determine whether the right to be forgotten could be extended to global search engines: for instance, to Google.com and not just Google.fr. The case was set in motion after Google refused to comply with CNIL’s recommendation to extend de-referencing to non-.fr domains.

Now, an advisor has recommended to the ECJ that the right to be forgotten is not extended. According to Advocate General Maciej Szpunar, the scope of the right to be forgotten should be limited to the EU. He argues that the right must be balanced against other core rights, such as the legitimate public interest in accessing data online.

Meanwhile, free speech advocates have put forward the argument that worldwide de-referencing could inadvertently empower countries which practice strict online censorship, such as China and Saudi Arabia.

The final judgement on the case is expected within the next three to six months.

“Public access to information, and the right to privacy, are important to people all around the world, as demonstrated by the number of global human rights, media and other organisations that have made their views known in this case,” said Peter Fleischer, senior privacy counsel at Google, in a statement.

“We’ve worked hard to ensure that the right to be forgotten is effective for Europeans, including using geolocation to ensure 99 per cent effectiveness.”

The right to be forgotten – the right of an individual to request the removal of links to “inadequate, irrelevant or excessive” information about them online – was put into force in the EU in 2014 (and previously in Argentina), in order to protect individuals from being “perpetually or periodically stigmatised as a consequence of a specific action performed in the past”.

EU, Icelandic, Lichtensteinian, Norwegian and Swiss citizens can request removal of links by completing a form through a search engine’s web site, after which it is assessed and – if approved – the links are removed from search results. If a search engine refuses a request, individuals can appeal to their national data protection agency. Once a link has been removed, the information remains online and could still be found using a non-EU based search engine.

For several years, the French data regulator – the Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertes (CNIL) – has sought to determine whether the right to be forgotten could be extended to global search engines: for instance, to Google.com and not just Google.fr. The case was set in motion after Google refused to comply with CNIL’s recommendation to extend de-referencing to non-.fr domains.

Now, an advisor has recommended to the ECJ that the right to be forgotten is not extended. According to Advocate General Maciej Szpunar, the scope of the right to be forgotten should be limited to the EU. He argues that the right must be balanced against other core rights, such as the legitimate public interest in accessing data online.

Meanwhile, free speech advocates have put forward the argument that worldwide de-referencing could inadvertently empower countries which practice strict online censorship, such as China and Saudi Arabia.

The final judgement on the case is expected within the next three to six months.

“Public access to information, and the right to privacy, are important to people all around the world, as demonstrated by the number of global human rights, media and other organisations that have made their views known in this case,” said Peter Fleischer, senior privacy counsel at Google, in a statement.

“We’ve worked hard to ensure that the right to be forgotten is effective for Europeans, including using geolocation to ensure 99 per cent effectiveness.”