The Personal Data Protection Bill 2019, which was tabled in Parliament recently, has measures pertaining to the 'right to be forgotten,' according to the Centre.
In India, the 'right to be forgotten' is a relatively new notion in which a person can request that online posts containing a humiliating photo, video, or news item about them be removed or deleted.
In an affidavit, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) declared that India is developing the worldwide legal notion of "right to be forgotten." The right to privacy is a fundamental right, as is the right to be forgotten, according to the Ministry.
The concept has gained acceptance in certain countries outside of the United States, particularly in the European Union (EU). While the right is not recognised by Indian law, it has recently been ruled to be an integral aspect of the right to privacy by Indian courts.
At least eight applications have been filed with the Delhi High Court, requesting that private information, court records of previous convictions and processes, and news reporting of past occurrences be removed off the Internet. So yet, just a few people have been able to obtain that relief from the courts.
Furthermore, "The Government of India, understanding the need to protect its citizens and their privacy, has brought out the Personal Data Protection Bill 2019. This Bill contains provisions related to the doctrine of ¡®right to be forgotten¡¯," the Ministry noted.?
MeitY's affidavit was made in response to a petition filed before the High Court by two businesspeople seeking to have certain publications connected to a criminal case filed against them removed from various web platforms.
In their combined suit, businessmen Jaideep Mirchandani, an NRI, and Siraj Amani claimed they were harmed by certain web stories about their detention in a 2002 case, from which they were acquitted in 2016.
The petition contended that, despite the fact that the businessmen "had been honourably released by the appropriate courts, the supposed articles and incorrect material published against petitioners continue to haunt them."
In light of the facts and circumstances of the case, the businessmen asserted that they have the 'right to be forgotten' or the 'right to delink.'
The Ministry further stated that the Material Technology Act allows for the restriction of some information from public access. According to the report, the IT Act also provides for the removal of certain illegal information from an intermediary site.
It stated that because the petitioners are seeking the revocation of a court order linked to information available online, the High Court could make direct orders to the parties involved.
Finally, in a brief response to one of the petitions earlier this week, the Centre reminded the Delhi High Court that the right to privacy has been recognised as a basic right in the K S Puttaswamy verdict (2017) and that the 'right to be forgotten' is growing in India.
According to the government, the Personal Data Protection Bill (a Joint Parliamentary Committee report on which was tabled on December 16) contains provisions for the 'right to be forgotten'.?
Earlier, the court had also issued notice to search engine giant Google on the businessmen¡¯s plea but declined to grant interim relief to them.
In a civil suit filed in May 2019 in the Delhi High Court, Justice Pratibha M Singh stated that the "right to be forgotten" and "right to be left alone" are inherent aspects of the right to privacy, and that the "right to be forgotten" and "right to be left alone" are inherent aspects of the right to privacy, and that the "right to be forgotten" and "right to be left alone" are inherent aspects of the right to privacy, and that the "right to be forgotten" and "right to
The MeitY's petition also cited two judgements from the Orissa High Court and the Karnataka High Court, in which the idea of the 'right to be forgotten' was acknowledged as an essential aspect of the 'right to privacy.'
In an order issued in 2015, the Karnataka High Court directed its registry to ensure that any Internet search engine does not include a woman's name.
In a case involving videos uploaded on Facebook by a rape suspect, the Orissa High Court ruled in November 2020 that "allowing such objectionable photos and videos to remain on a social media platform, without the consent of a woman, is a direct affront to a woman's modesty and, more importantly, her right to privacy."
It did not, however, issue an order for the videos to be taken down.
Article 17 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) provides for the right to erasure of certain categories of personal data, including data that is no longer necessary, data for which consent has been withdrawn or processing has been objected to, personal data that has been unlawfully processed, and data for which there is a legal obligation to erasure.
The regulations do, however, limit the right to erasure in certain circumstances, such as for public health reasons, archiving purposes "in the public interest, scientific or historical research purposes, or statistical purposes in accordance," and the "establishment, exercise, or defence of legal claims."
In 2015, Russia passed a law allowing users to request that a search engine remove links to personal information if they are irrelevant, inaccurate, or in violation of the law. Turkey and Siberia also recognise the right to be forgotten to some extent, and Spanish and English courts have decided on the issue.
For more on news and current affairs from around the world please visit Indiatimes News.