Balance in right to privacy

The European Court of Justice ruling that Google can be asked by national authorities to take down search results when asked to protect the right to privacy has far- reaching implications. Those advocating the “right to be forgotten” have prevailed in being able to protect themselves, at least from information turning up that has no particular public relevance, is too old, or infringes on their right to privacy.

The biggies of the cyberworld are shocked at a sweeping verdict with which they may have to comply, in Europe at least. Search engines like Google have maintained they are merely pulling out content from what is on the worldwide web on search queries input by Internet users, and that they are not a party to creating such information nor hosting it themselves. Google, Bing and Yahoo! could be disrupted by a tsunami of such requests.

The right to freedom versus the right to free speech is an old debate made doubly complicated by lesser controls over the Internet and its international sweep. The court also indicated that Internet giants cannot get away by saying their servers are located elsewhere. While the technology industry has generally been driven by the American concept of unfettered freedom of speech, Europeans have tended to rely on a tradition of a man willing to fight to protect his honour.

The road to finding a balance between public interest and personal privacy is tricky. The latest judgment can be said to be a milestone rather than a permanent roadblock. The world would largely agree that Internet freedom is vital to man.