The Right to Be Forgotten: Balancing Digital Privacy in 2025

Introduction

In today’s digital world, everything we do online leaves a trace. From social media posts and news articles to court records and financial transactions, our digital footprints remain permanent, accessible to anyone with an internet connection. While this accessibility promotes transparency and accountability, it also poses a significant risk to personal privacy and reputation.

This is where the Right to Be Forgotten (RTBF) comes into play. It is a legal right that allows individuals to request the removal or de-indexing of personal information from search engines, databases, and online platforms when that data is no longer relevant, outdated, excessive, or damaging.

The RTBF is a controversial issue because it requires striking a balance between individual privacy rights and the public’s right to access information. Should a person’s past mistakes, legal troubles, or embarrassing moments define them forever? Or should they have the right to move forward without their history haunting them online?

This article explores the meaning, legal evolution, global judicial cases, and future of the Right to Be Forgotten, particularly in India, the European Union, and other international jurisdictions.

What is the Right to Be Forgotten?

The Right to Be Forgotten is a legal principle that allows individuals to request that search engines, websites, or digital platforms remove or delist information that is outdated, irrelevant, excessive, or no longer necessary.

However, it is not an absolute right—it must be weighed against freedom of expression, historical documentation, and public interest.

Legal Definitions of the Right to Be Forgotten

European Union (GDPR – General Data Protection Regulation, 2018)
- Article 17 of the GDPR formally establishes the Right to Erasure (Right to Be Forgotten).
- Individuals can request removal of personal data under certain conditions, such as:
  - When the data is no longer needed for its original purpose.
  - If the person withdraws consent for data processing.
  - When the information is inaccurate, defamatory, or excessively harmful.
  - If the data was collected unlawfully.
India (Judicial Interpretation in Privacy Cases)
- The Right to Be Forgotten is not explicitly recognized in Indian law but has been interpreted through judicial decisions under privacy and dignity rights.
- Courts have ruled that individuals can request the removal of past criminal records, news articles, and online content when they cause unwarranted harm.
United States (Limited Recognition Due to Free Speech Protections)
- Unlike the EU, the US Constitution prioritizes the First Amendment (Freedom of Speech & Press), making RTBF difficult to implement.
- However, limited protections exist for juvenile criminal record expungement, defamation, and privacy violations.

Evolution of the Right to Be Forgotten

The Right to Be Forgotten has evolved as societies have moved from traditional media to digital information landscapes.

1. Historical Background: Privacy vs. Public Memory

Before the digital era, physical records (court judgments, news archives, police records) were harder to access and often forgotten over time.
With the rise of the internet, search engines, and digital media, past records became permanently accessible, raising concerns about privacy and reputation management.

2. The Landmark Google Spain Case (2014) – Establishing the RTBF

The Right to Be Forgotten was officially recognized by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the case of:

Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v. Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD), and Mario Costeja González (2014)
A Spanish citizen, Mario Costeja González, requested that Google remove outdated financial records from search results linked to his name.
He argued that his past financial difficulties were no longer relevant and were damaging his reputation.
The ECJ ruled in favor of González, stating that search engines must delist links containing outdated or excessive personal data upon request.

Impact of the Judgment:

Established the Right to Be Forgotten in Europe.
Led to Article 17 of the GDPR, making RTBF a legal obligation for digital platforms.
Forced Google and other search engines to implement removal request mechanisms.

Judicial Recognition of the Right to Be Forgotten in India

India has no specific legislation for the Right to Be Forgotten, but courts have recognized it through privacy and dignity-based judgments.

1. K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) – Laying the Foundation

The Supreme Court of India recognized Privacy as a Fundamental Right under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The ruling paved the way for future discussions on RTBF, as it emphasized individual autonomy over personal data.

2. Jorawar Singh Mundy v. Union of India (2021) – Criminal Records and RTBF

The Delhi High Court directed Google to remove past criminal records of a U.S. citizen who had been acquitted.
The court ruled that keeping the records online unfairly harmed the petitioner’s reputation and employment prospects.

3. X v. Registrar General, Karnataka High Court (2021) – Balancing Privacy and Public Interest

A man requested the removal of his legal case from public databases to prevent reputational damage.
The Karnataka High Court acknowledged the Right to Be Forgotten but stated that court judgments are public records and cannot be erased entirely.

These cases show that Indian courts are slowly recognizing RTBF, but they are also weighing it against press freedom and judicial transparency.

Importance and Relevance in Contemporary Times

The Right to Be Forgotten is more relevant today than ever before due to the widespread use of social media, data breaches, and digital surveillance.

1. Protection from Digital Stigma and Social Prejudice

People’s past mistakes should not permanently define them.
RTBF allows individuals to move on from past controversies, legal issues, or defamatory content.

2. Cyber Harassment and Revenge Porn Cases

Victims of cyber harassment, non-consensual pornography, or online defamation need legal recourse to remove harmful content.
Many countries, including the UK and Canada, require tech companies to delete intimate content upon request.

3. Right to Reputation vs. Freedom of Expression

RTBF is often misused by politicians, criminals, or corporations to erase negative records.
Courts must balance privacy rights with journalistic integrity and historical documentation.

4. The Role of AI and Digital Data

The rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) raises concerns about data permanence and misinformation.
RTBF could be crucial in regulating deepfake content and AI-generated misinformation.

Challenges and Future of the Right to Be Forgotten

1. Conflict with Free Speech and Historical Records

Some argue that RTBF erodes press freedom by allowing individuals to erase factual history.
Example: Politicians removing corruption cases under the guise of privacy.

2. Global Legal Disparities

While the EU enforces RTBF through GDPR, the US prioritizes free speech, making RTBF difficult to implement globally.

3. India’s Upcoming Data Protection Law (DPDP, 2023)

India is drafting new data protection laws that may include:
- User-controlled data deletion rights.
- Mechanisms for search engines to delist sensitive personal data.
- Public interest exemptions to prevent misuse.

Conclusion

The Right to Be Forgotten is a crucial privacy right in the digital age, helping individuals regain control over their online identity. However, courts and policymakers must balance privacy, press freedom, and historical accountability.

As digital laws evolve, the future of RTBF will depend on global cooperation, ethical AI regulation, and responsible data governance. The question remains: Should the internet remember everything, or should individuals have the right to be forgotten?