Preserving the record: On the right to be forgotten
The article discusses the tension between the right to be forgotten and the principle of open justice in India. It highlights a recent Delhi High Court ruling that emphasizes the need for digital accuracy in judicial records while balancing privacy rights. The court's decision suggests that simply updating records is insufficient, as it fails to address the accessibility of complete information.
- ▪The Supreme Court of India recognized the right to informational privacy in 2017.
- ▪The Delhi High Court ruled on the 'right to be forgotten' on May 29, illustrating a conflict between privacy and open justice.
- ▪Justice Sachin Datta emphasized the need for digital accuracy in judicial records to ensure public access to complete information.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
On the one hand, constitutional law holds up a principle of open justice that, among other things, allows public scrutiny of courts, facilitates public understanding of the law, and creates a historical record of the administration of justice. On the other, in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (2017), the Supreme Court of India recognised the right to informational privacy, including the ability of individuals to exercise some control over personal information about themselves. The Delhi High Court order on May 29 concerning the ‘right to be forgotten’ illustrates how these two principles can sometimes point in opposite directions.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at The Hindu.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from The Hindu
