Invoking the defense of freedom of expression, the Court emphasized “the social right to information of individuals who live in a democratic state.”
That freedom, the ruling understood, “also includes the right to transmit ideas, facts and opinions through the Internet and search engines, a tool that has become a great public forum due to the facilities it provides to access information and to express data, ideas and opinions”.
The Court did not deny the existence of a “right to be forgotten”, but it did not consider it applicable to the Denegri case, although it left the possibility of preventive actions against Internet search engines ajar.
Denegri had obtained from the Civil Justice a ruling that accepted his claim for certain episodes of his past life to be removed from the internet, as a way to protect his integrity and his new life.
That principle, called the “right to be forgotten,” earned an appeal from the search engine Google, that went all the way to the Supreme Court.
The highest court held a two-day public hearing in which it heard the parties and organizations and jurists, with arguments for and against the “right to be forgotten.”
Finally, the court held that Denegri “is a public person who just gained notoriety at that time, who voluntarily exposed himself to the television programs that he questions today,” around the episode known as the “Coppola Case.”
“Eliminating such content -considered the Court- would affect freedom of expression, and would deprive society of having access to that information”.
“The National Constitution guarantees broad protection for freedom of expression, which has a preeminent place within the framework of our constitutional freedoms, among other reasons, due to its importance for the functioning of a democratic republic and for the exercise of collective self-government of the manner established by it,” said the ruling.
The judges warned that making room for reasoning “based on particular tastes or points of view” leads to a “standard of analysis, an extremely malleable and subjective variable that opens the door to arbitrariness and, therefore, weakens the protection of expression” .
Source: Ambito
David William is a talented author who has made a name for himself in the world of writing. He is a professional author who writes on a wide range of topics, from general interest to opinion news. David is currently working as a writer at 24 hours worlds where he brings his unique perspective and in-depth research to his articles, making them both informative and engaging.
