The “Right to Be Forgotten”: Negotiating Public and Private Ordering in the European Union

2017 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Marie Chenou ◽  
Roxana Radu
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
The Internet ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Personal Lives ◽  
Private Ordering ◽  
Right To Be Forgotten ◽  
Governance Practices ◽  
The Right

Although the Internet is frequently referred to as a global public resource, its functioning remains predominantly controlled by private actors. The Internet brought about significant shifts in the way we conceptualize (global) governance. In particular, the handling of “big data” by private intermediaries has a direct impact on routine practices and personal lives. The implementation of the “right to be forgotten” following the May 2014 decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union against Google blurs the boundaries between the public and the private, and extends the responsibilities of the latter to court-style decision making. This article analyzes the regulatory developments in this area and the implications of outsourcing of important governance practices to private intermediaries. It looks at the decision-making process for the “right to be forgotten” to illustrate the extent to which the hybridization of such procedures results in new arrangements between public and private ordering in Internet governance.

scholarly journals The politics of embedding and the right to remain in post-Brexit Britain

Ethnicities ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 146879682091341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiina Sotkasiira ◽  
Anna Gawlewicz
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Union Membership ◽  
The Other ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Sense Of Security ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right

The European Union membership referendum (i.e. the Brexit referendum) in the United Kingdom in 2016 triggered a process of introspection among non-British European Union citizens with respect to their right to remain in the United Kingdom, including their right to entry, permanent residence, and access to work and social welfare. Drawing on interview data collected from 42 European Union nationals, namely Finnish and Polish migrants living in Scotland, we explore how European Union migrants’ decision-making and strategies for extending their stay in the United Kingdom, or returning to their country of origin, are shaped by and, in turn, shape their belonging and ties to their current place of residence and across state borders. In particular, we draw on the concept of embedding, which is used in migration studies to explain migration trajectories and decision-making. Our key argument is that more attention needs to be paid to the socio-political context within which migrants negotiate their embedding. To this end, we employ the term ‘politics of embedding’ to highlight the ways in which the embedding of non-British European Union citizens has been politicized and hierarchically structured in the United Kingdom after the Brexit referendum. By illustrating how the context of Brexit has changed how people evaluate their social and other attachments, and how their embedding is differentiated into ‘ties that bind’ and ‘ties that count’, we contribute to the emerging work on migration and Brexit, and specifically to the debate on how the politicization of migration shapes the sense of security on the one hand, and belonging, on the other.

scholarly journals PROTECTION OF ECONOMIC COMPETITION: AN OVERVIEW OF THE LATEST LEGISLATIVE NOVELTIES

2019 ◽  
pp. 165-171
Author(s):  
Sergii Shkliar ◽  
Olha Bulaieva
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Economic Competition ◽  
Time Limits ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

Purpose. The article is dedicated to the analysis of the main changes introduced by the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Some Laws of Ukraine ensuring the principles of procedural justice and increasing the efficiency of proceedings in cases of violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition”. Methods. Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Some Laws of Ukraine ensuring the principles of procedural justice and increasing the efficiency of proceedings in cases of violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition” proposes the implementation of several novelties. Among them are: the restriction for the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine by certain time limits for considering cases; possibility of extension of the term for consideration of cases by decision of the Committee’s State Commissioner or head of a territorial office; renewal of deadlines for consideration of cases where the respondent is replaced or a co-respondent is involved; provision for the consequences of missing the deadlines for considering cases and also the mechanism of consultations during the consideration of a case, which may be appointed either on the initiative of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine or on the motion of interested persons. Results. The abovementioned amendments will influence the existing system of economic competition protection in a serious way. Among the changes are: – the fine for delayed payment of a fine imposed by the Antimonopoly Committees of Ukraine decision on violation of the legislation on the protection of economic competition is cancelled; – the member of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine who conducted or organized an investigation is deprived of the right to vote in the process of decision-making in the respective case; – the procedure for holding hearings is defined; – recusals and self-recusals are envisaged for the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine officers; – the grounds for acquiring the third-party status in a case are changed; – the rights of persons involved in the case are specified and expanded. An important remark of the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Some Laws of Ukraine ensuring the principles of procedural justice and increasing the efficiency of proceedings in cases of violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition” is that a person that is exempted from liability or whose fine is reduced shall still be liable for damage caused by the violation to other persons. Conclusions. As a result, Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Some Laws of Ukraine ensuring the principles of procedural justice and increasing the efficiency of proceedings in cases of violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition” is expected to become an important step forward in increasing the effectiveness of investigations into violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition. It can also be regarded as the next step to harmonize Ukrainian legislation with the European Union acquis.

scholarly journals Collective memory or the right to be forgotten? Cultures of digital memory and forgetting in the European Union

2021 ◽  
pp. 175069802110447
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Stainforth
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Collective Memory ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Memory Studies ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Regulation ◽  
Digital Memory ◽  
Right To Be Forgotten ◽  
Google Books ◽  
The Right

This article investigates cultures of digital memory and forgetting in the European Union. The article first gives some background to key debates in media memory studies, before going on to analyse the shaping of European Commission and European Union initiatives in relation to Google’s activities from the period 2004–present. The focus of inquiry for the discussion of memory is the Google Books project and Europeana, a database of digitized cultural collections drawn from European museums, libraries and archives. Attention is then given to questions of forgetting by exploring the tension between Google’s search and indexing mechanisms and the right to be forgotten. The article ends by reflecting on the scale of the shift in contemporary cultures of memory and forgetting, and considers how far European regulation enables possible interventions in this domain.

scholarly journals Algorytm jako informacja publiczna w prawie europejskim

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Mazur
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Access Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Automated Decision Making

The author verifies the hypothesis concerning the possibility of using algorithms – applied in automated decision making in public sector – as information which is subject to the law governing the right to access information or the right to access official documents in European law. She discusses problems caused by the approach to these laws in the European Union, as well as lack of conformity of the jurisprudence between the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights.

The Right To Be Forgotten

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward L. Carter
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Search Engines ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Right To Be Forgotten ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The right to be forgotten is an emerging legal concept allowing individuals control over their online identities by demanding that Internet search engines remove certain results. The right has been supported by the European Court of Justice, some judges in Argentina, and data-protection regulators in several European countries, among others. The right is primarily grounded in notions of privacy and data protection but also relates to intellectual property, reputation, and right of publicity. Scholars and courts cite, as an intellectual if not legal root for the right to be forgotten, the legal principle that convicted criminals whose sentences are completed should not continually be publicly linked with their crimes. Critics contend that the right to be forgotten stands in conflict with freedom of expression and can lead to revisionist history. Scholars and others in the southern cone of South America, in particular, have decried the right to be forgotten because it could allow perpetrators of mass human rights abuses to cover up or obscure their atrocities. On the other hand, those in favor of the right to be forgotten say that digital technology preserves memory unnaturally and can impede forgiveness and individual progress. The right to be forgotten debate is far from resolved and poses difficult questions about access to, and control of, large amounts of digital information across national borders. Given the global nature of the Internet and the ubiquity of certain powerful search engines, the questions at issue are universal, but solutions thus far have been piecemeal. Although a 2014 decision by the Court of Justice of the European Union (EU) garnered much attention, the right to be forgotten has been largely shaped by a 1995 European Union Directive on Data Protection. In 2016, the EU adopted a new General Data Protection Regulation that will take effect in 2018 and could have a major impact because it contains an explicit right to be forgotten (also called right to erasure). The new regulation does not focus on the theoretical or philosophical justification for a right to be forgotten, and it appears likely the debate over the right in the EU and beyond will not be resolved even when the new rule takes effect.

Can public access to documents support the transparency of automated decision-making? The European Union law perspective

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Mazur
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Access Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Automated Decision Making ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACT Due to the concerns which are raised regarding the impact of automated decision-making (ADM) on transparency and their potential discriminatory character, it is worth examining the possibility of applying legal measures which could serve to increase transparency of ADM systems. The article explores the possibility to consider algorithms used in ADM systems as documents subjected to the right to access documents in European Union (EU) law. It is focused on contrasting and comparing the approach based on the right to access public documents developed by the Court of Justice of European Union (CJEU) with the approach to the right to access public information as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The analysis shows discrepancies in the perspectives presented by these Courts which result in a limited scope of the right to access public documents in EU law. Pointing out these differences may provide a motivation to clarify the meaning of the right to access information in EU law, the CJEU’s approach remaining as for now incoherent. The article presents the arguments for and ways of bringing together the approaches of the CJEU and the ECtHR in the light of a decreasing level of transparency resulting from the use of ADM in the public sector. It shows that in order to ensure compliance with EU law, it is necessary to rethink the role which the right to access information plays in the human rights catalogue.

scholarly journals Constitutional basis of Austria’s accession to the European Union

2009 ◽  
pp. 111-119
Author(s):  
E. A. Vodyanitskaya
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Central Government ◽  
National Council ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Federal Constitution ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

On 1 January 1995 Austria became a member of the European Union. Austria’s accession to the EU constituted the most important transfer of jurisdiction in the history of the Federal Constitution. On this occasion the Austrian legislature passed an amendment to the Federal Constitution which provides for the participation of Austrian organs in the decision-making process of the European Union. The legal basis of Austria’s membership in the EU is the treaty on accession to the European Union and the special constitutional bill authorizing the competent authorities to ratify the treaty on accession. First of all, provisions on the election of Austrian members to the European Parliament were introduced by the amendment into the Constitution. Secondly, the amendment contains a procedure for participation of the Austrian lands and local governments in the decisions of the European Union. Thirdly, the legislative bodies on the central government level (National Council and Federal Council) are also accorded the right to participate in decision-making of the EU. Finally, a special provision confirming Austria’s participation in the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the Union was introduced.

scholarly journals Right to be forgotten: european data imperialism, national privilege, or universal human right?

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-152
Author(s):  
Oskar J. Gstrein
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Data ◽  
Right To Be Forgotten ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

The Digital Age has fundamentally reshaped the preconditions for privacy and freedom of expression. This transpires in the debate about a "right to be forgotten". While the 2014 decision of the European Court of Justice in "Google Spain" touches upon the underlying issue of how increasing amounts of personal data affects individuals over time, the topic has also become one of the salient problems of Internet Governance. On 24th September 2019 the European Court of Justice delivered its judgment in "Google vs CNIL" (C-507/17) which was supposed to clarify the territorial scope of the right. However, this judgment has raised doubts about the enforceability of the General Data Protection Regulation, and reveals the complex, multi-layered governance structure of the European Union. Acknowledging such complexity at a substantive and institutional level, this article starts by analysing the judgment. Additionally, to better understand the current situation in the European Union and its member states, recently produced draft guidelines by the European Data Protection Board are presented and discussed, as well as two judgments of the German Federal Constitutional Court. Subsequently, the European developments are put in international context. Finally, the insights from these sections are combined which allows to develop several conceptual ideas. In conclusion, it is argued that the right to be forgotten remains complex and evolving. Its success depends on effective multi-layer and multistakeholder interaction. In this sense, it has become a prominent study object that reveals potential venues and pitfalls on a path towards more sophisticated data protection frameworks.

scholarly journals The Right to Be Heard in the European Union – Case Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 264
Author(s):  
Pranvera Beqiraj (Mihani)
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Individual Measure ◽  
Right To Good Administration ◽  
The Right

The right to be heard as a fundamental right within the Europen legal order was included in the right to good administration in the Charter of Fundamental Right of the European Union and imposes that every person has the right to be heard before any individual measure which would affect him or er adversely is taken. However, the Court of Justice of the European Union has a consolidated jurisprudence regarding the right to be heard which has already recognized it as a general principle and fundamental right. This paper will analyze this case law , which determine the nature of the decision-making process where this right must be applied, the nature of the decision taken and the way the interests of the person concened are affected. For this purpose different decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union are taken under study.

Political Asylum and Sovereignty-Sharing in Europe

2008 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 206-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hakan G. Sicakkan
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Policy Change ◽  
Institutional Arrangements ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Asylum ◽  
Brief Assessment ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractIn focusing on the relationships between asylum recognition rates and the different institutional arrangements through which European states share or preserve their sovereignty, this article seeks to show how sovereignty-sharing affects the right to political asylum in practice. After a qualitative overview of variations in sovereignty-sharing forms, the article presents the results from a multiple regression analysis of the relationship between legal and institutional frames of asylum decision-making in 17 West European countries (EU-15, Norway and Switzerland) and the asylum recognition rates in these countries. The article ends with a brief assessment of the significance of the results for a potential policy change in the European Union.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document