Catches to the right to be forgotten,looking from an administrative law perspective to data processing by public authorities

Public authorities process personal data. In most cases these data are processed because there is a legal obligation to do so, or because processing is necessary for the performance of a task carried out in the public interest. The right to be forgotten or to erasure will, in this situation, play a limited role in the protection of the rights of the individual. There is even a public interest in maintaining archives, thus in not forgetting. At the same time, the possibility exists that not forgetting might be more valuable for the protection of rights of data subjects then forgetting. In the case of data processing by public authorities, it is important that the processing is based on a law. A close watch should be held on the grounds that public authorities use to justify the processing. As the right to be forgotten will play a limited role in the protection of the rights of data subjects in the case of data processed by public authorities, it is important to emphasize the right of access and rectification of data. It is therefore essential that the controller is transparent to the public with regard to the processing of data.     

A historian's view on the right to be forgotten

This essay explores the consequences for historians of the ‘right to be forgotten', a new concept proposed by the European Commission in 2012. I first explain that the right to be forgotten is a radical variant of the right to privacy and clarify the consequences of the concept for the historical study of public and private figures. I then treat the hard cases of spent and amnestied convictions and of internet archives. I further discuss the applicability of the right to be forgotten to dead persons as part of the problem of posthumous privacy, and finally point to the ambiguity of the impact of the passage of time. While I propose some compromise solutions, I also conclude that a generalized right to be forgotten would lead to the rewriting of history in ways that impoverish our insights not only into anecdotal lives but also into the larger trends of history.     

The right to be forgotten – a Dutch perspective

This paper will be investigate to what extent the right to be forgotten as proposed by the European Commission is already recognized in Dutch tort law. The focus of this paper will be on the existence and the desirability of such a right and not on questions of enforcement. It is submitted that although Dutch law does not recognize the right to be forgotten as such, several judicial decisions can be identified that afford protection to interests that are also protected by the proposed right to be forgotten. This indicates that in the Netherlands a right to be forgotten in some form or another might have developed over time but this would have been a lengthy affair. A more precise formulation of this right by the legislator is therefore welcomed. It has been remarked that the name ‘right to be forgotten’ may give rise to unrealistic expectations but the Dutch experience shows that people do not seem to be very aware of their rights. ‘A right to be forgotten’ – however imprecise from a legal viewpoint – might be catchy enough to remedy this.     

The right to be forgotten: The Israeli version

The right to be forgotten and erase, originally introduced in the well-known case of Google Spain, has caused considerable legal debates on both theoretical and procedural issues. The Israeli Supreme Court has also just recently considered the issue when it was asked to enforce the right to be forgotten of an Israeli advocate, Jonathan Miller, and delist harmful information which appeared in a Google search, and was in truth related to a different adv. Jonathan Miller. The plaintiff relied on the Israeli Prohibition of Defamation Law. Liability was denied on the basis that the information was indeed true, and thus- justified. We suggest in this article that the court should have imposed liability in negligence, an open ended general tort that mainly applies when particular torts fail to supply a reasonable and just solution in new factual situations due to change in social, economic and technological circumstances.     

被遗忘权立法的美国模式及其立法启示——以加州被遗忘权立法为研究背景

“被遗忘权”是大数据时代个人信息删除制度的立法新发展。美国并不赞同欧盟模式的被遗忘权。加利福尼亚州立足美国法制传统构建了一个体现美国利益需求的被遗忘权。加州立法从维护个人发展权意义上建构未成年人的被遗忘权,以数据最小化原则为基础,建构适用于消费者与企业之间数据处理的被遗忘权,赋予个人删除本人发布的个人信息的权利,同时规定了一系列删除信息的例外,较好地协调了被遗忘权与言论自由和信息经济发展的矛盾。加州立法已成为美国个人信息保护立法的典范。未来,美国可能以加州模式为模板构建媲美欧盟被遗忘权的个人信息删除制度。加州对被遗忘权制度的取舍对我国《个人信息保护法》第47条的理解与适用具有启示意义。     

信息自由与网络监管的法理分析

以互联网为基础载体的网络信息传播,极大限度地维护了公民的言论自由、表达自由、知情权、监督权等的实现,但同时网络信息的匿名性、无序性、任意性的传播特点也为滥用表达自由、言论自由提供了最近场所,并因此对公共利益、国家利益和私人利益造成强烈冲击,导致多元化权益损害问题日益突出。网民在充分享有网络信息自由的同时,履行维护网络秩序、维护国家信息安全和公共秩序安全的义务,是一个行为的两方面。从法学理论的角度讲,网络信息自由与网络监管有度限制信息自由辩证统一,协调二者的平衡是信息时代各国政府面临的重大法律治理问题。     

The Singapore Personal Data Protection Act and an assessment of future trends in data privacy reform

In the first part of this paper, I will present and explain the Singapore Personal Data Protection Act (“PDPA”) in the context of legislative developments in the Asian region and against the well-established international baseline privacy standards. In the course of the above evaluation, reference will be made to the national laws and policy on data privacy prior to the enactment of the PDPA as well as current social and market practices in relation to personal data. In the second part of this paper, I will decipher and assess the future trends in data privacy reform and the future development of the privacy regime in Singapore and beyond. In the course of this analysis, international standards, technological trends and recent legal developments in other jurisdictions will be considered.     

Germany's ‘Right to be forgotten’ – between the freedom of expression and the right to informational self-determination

Although never having defined it explicitly, German law and jurisprudence imparted a right to be forgotten which could be described as a right to delete long ago. Its basis can be found in the constitution where it is torn between the freedom of expression and the right to informational self-determination. Also, German legislature introduced non-constitutional provisions ensuring the deletion of personal data in specific cases that are applied regularly. This article aims to give an overview of the “German” right to be forgotten, its legal framework and its application in court.     

The EU Proposal for a General Data Protection Regulation and the roots of the ‘right to be forgotten’

The EU Proposal for a General Data Protection Regulation has caused a wide debate between lawyers and legal scholars and many opinions have been voiced on the issue of the right to be forgotten. In order to analyse the relevance of the new rule provided by Article 17 of the Proposal, this paper considers the original idea of the right to be forgotten, pre-existing in both European and U.S. legal frameworks. This article focuses on the new provisions of Article 17 of the EU Proposal for a General Data Protection Regulation and evaluates its effects on court decisions. The author assumes that the new provisions do not seem to represent a revolutionary change to the existing rules with regard to the right granted to the individual, but instead have an impact on the extension of the protection of the information disseminated on-line.     

The United Nations data privacy system and its limits

ABSTRACT

While the United Nations (UN) pioneered in recognizing the impact of modern technological developments on (data) privacy as far back as 1968, little has so far been achieved in terms of introducing a truly global data privacy framework. The present UN data privacy framework is by and large a mere patchwork of rules that exhibit a number of weaknesses. This weak structure of the present framework is a result of political and ideological controversies of the Cold War era. This article considers the extent to which the current UN data privacy system provides protection to data privacy and highlights its major limitations. It concludes that the discourse at the UN set in motion, particularly in the aftermath of the Snowden revelations, wields a potential to result in a major reform in the UN data privacy system.     

论隐私权的刑法保护

隐私权的刑法保护顺应了我国保护人权的发展趋势;体现了我国刑法由"国家主义"向"人本主义"的转变;符合防治严重侵犯隐私权行为的客观要求.我国刑法典保护隐私权的相关规定缺乏系统性和科学性,具有间接性.建议我国刑法设立"非法获取、散布隐私罪".     

隐私权新论——试论罪犯的隐私权

隐私权作为一项个人的权利,越来越受到人们的重视,但作为特殊群体的罪犯是否也享有隐私权呢?刑满释放人员对其曾经的犯罪事实是否也享有隐私权呢?本文将就该问题予以论述。     

突发公共卫生事件中位置数据的披露:基于健康权和隐私权的视角

位置数据披露在防控新冠病毒(COVID-19)等传染病期间在国家、公共卫生机构及个人层面具有三重价值、成效显赫;但也暴露出健康权与隐私权之间的内在张力.全球范围内存在三种位置数据披露模式:一是模糊地理数据披露模式,即向所有公众公开仅涉及概括性、脱敏性的位置数据信息;二是对特定人群信息披露模式,针对可能的密切接触者等特定...     

The ‘right to be forgotten’ or the ‘principle that has been remembered’

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled on questions referred by a Spanish court relating to interpretation of the Data Protection Directive and its application to search engine activities. In a controversial judgment, the CJEU found that search engines are data controllers in respect of their search results; that European data protection law applies to their processing of the data of EU citizens, even where they process the relevant data outside the EU; and that a ‘right to be forgotten’ online applies to outdated and irrelevant data in search results unless there is a public interest in the data remaining available and even where the search results link to lawfully published content.     

论民法典中人格权的实证概念

尽管我国民法典以独立成编的方式规定了人格权,但是,由于对人格权的概念存在巨大争议,所以,从民法典人格权编的具体内容和规范来反观人格权的实证概念对于理论研究和司法实践更具有意义。从我国民法典的内容看,我国民法典人格权编实际上包括了两个部分:一是对人格权的保护,二是对人格尊严的保护。隐私权与信息的二元保护就清楚地说明了这一问题。因此,不能认为人格权编中保护的都是人格权。必须把人格权的概念与人格利益区分开来,从而决定其保护程度与救济措施的差别。另外,从表面上看,虽然看起来都是相同的权利(人格权),但是,法人和非法人组织的人格权与自然人的人格权建立在完全不同或者说完全不相关的基础之上--自然人的人格权是以人的自由和尊严为核心的,而法人或者非法人组织的所谓人格权完全是技术处理的结果。当然,这种处理方式也可以通过其他方式处理。荣誉权无论从哪个方面看,都不具有人格权的特征;虽然民法典对其予以了明确规定,但是,荣誉权确实不应该是人身自由和人格尊严的表现,我们在实践中应当将其作为一种特殊权利对待。总之,人格权可以定义为:自然人享有的人之所以为人的主体性权利,包括生命权、身体权、健康权、姓名权、肖像权、名誉权、荣誉权、隐私权等权利,是个人自由、尊严在民法上的具体体现。法人仅仅享有与自由和尊严无关的名称权、荣誉权和名誉权,但法人的名称权、荣誉权和名誉权在实质上不是人格权。     

美国信息隐私立法透析

美国法以隐私权作为个人信息保护的权利基础,在公领域,实行分散立法模式;在私领域,美国选择了行业自律模式,在全球个人信息保护立法中产生了巨大的影响。美国制定信息隐私保护政策和法律的基本思路是力求在信息流通和隐私保护之间寻求平衡。信息隐私权是美国信息隐私法上的一个核心概念,它是随着社会对个人信息的保护而产生的,指个人针对其信息所享有决定权、支配权和控制权。     

论我国基因信息不知情权的确立

基因信息对健康状况具有强烈的预测性,出于诸种原因当事人未必想知晓基因信息.为充分尊重自我决定权,比较法上承认权利人享有基因信息不知情权.基因信息不知情权指权利人有权预先决定是否接受基因信息的披露,其核心要义为“知情拒绝权”.基因信息不知情权旨在保障权利人对基因信息的自主控制,在我国隐私权与个人信息区分规制的立法模式下,...     

Exploring the non-absolute nature of the right to data protection

In two recent judgements, the Court of Justice of the European Union stated that ‘The right to the protection of personal data is not, however, an absolute right, but must be considered in relation to its function in society’ (Eifert, para 48). This paper considers the ‘non-absolute’ nature of the right to data protection. Being a relatively new right, the boundaries of this right in the Charter are still somewhat unexplored. This paper considers five aspects that can be seen as setting boundaries to the otherwise absolute nature of the right to data protection: (a) consideration of the function of the right to data protection in society; (b) positive delimitations of the right that come from the formulation of the right (Article 8) in the Charter; (c) limitations on the right provided for in Article 52 of the Charter; (d) close connections with Article 7 of the Charter and Article 8 ECHR; and (e) the detailed provisions in current data protection secondary legislation and the future data protection regulation framework. Based on the reflections on each of these boundary-setting aspects, the paper argues that in spite of occasional vagueness and conflicting approaches of each of the aspects, understanding of the right to data protection has evolved since its first formulation in the Charter. There is a subtle and gradual distancing from the initial understanding of the close relationship with the right to private and family life. This gradual distancing is a positive development as the two have different foundations, scope and purposes. Yet it is only when both are taken together that the shared common objective of providing effective protection to citizens' personal and family life can be achieved.     

国际贸易中的人权问题——以发展权为视角

发展权是当代人权的核心内容,目前的主要问题是发展中国家的发展问题.国际贸易中劳工标准、产品质量标准、环境保护标准以及药品价格等的确立不仅影响发展中国家许多有关个人的经济、社会和文化权利的实现,而且还影响发展中国家以环境权、可持续发展等为内容的集体人权的发展.国际贸易应坚持非歧视原则,促进发展权的实现.     

论我国的罢工权立法

本文在分析罢工权法律性质的基础上,对我国规定罢工权的必要性和可行性进行了深刻的分析,并最终提出在我国进行罢工权立法的具体立法设计。