[ad_1]
Since the beginning of the year I am new rules on the right to be forgotten entered into force in Italy. Related to justice reform launched by the former Minister of Justice, Marta Cartabiapredict that a person acquitted in a process he can ask and obtain that it is indicated in the sentence the obligation for search engines to de-index articles newspaper or other content on the subject. To greet the news there was a tweet from Enrico Costa, deputy for Action in the Justice Commission and inspirer of the amendment on the right to be forgotten recognized in the Cartabia law.
The new rules on the right to be forgotten, contained in thearticle 64-ter of the Cartabia reform of the Penal Codehowever raised objections not so much to the principle itself, but to the practical applications. Doubts that, one month after the entry into force of the law, it is still not possible to completely resolve, while wiretapping has invaded the field of debate on judicial rules.
What you need to know:
What the law says
But let’s go in order. And let’s start from what the Cartabia reform says. The new right to be forgotten is contained in article 64-ter, which states:
In other words, the person acquitted or whose position has been filed can request that the prohibition be inserted at the end of the sentence a index that data on the internet. Or to de-index them, if something is already circulating. In short, if Mario Rossi turns out to be innocent after a trial for fraud, he can get his data relating to that trial to be de-indexed. “The Cartabia reform applies in reference to the criminal trial and in the case of sentence of acquittal, acquittal or non-proceedings. At the end of the process, with these three measures, de-indexing can be requested”, explains Nicole Monte, lawyer of the law firm 42Lawfirm, specialized in law and digital.
If put this way it seems simple, the law actually presents a series of nuances that make it more complex to evaluate its effects. Why the right to be forgotten calls into question various protections and safeguards of society. On the one hand the one promoted by Costa, inspirer of the proposal, who a Wired He says: “For me, on the one hand there is the duty of the state to investigate certain facts and on the other hand the duty to ensure that those who are innocent go back to being the same person they were before ending up in the judicial machinery”. At the same time, there is a right to inform and be informed, also in matters of justice. And then there is a third aspect: the right to be forgotten has already been guaranteed in Italy since 1993, by article 52 of the then Privacy Code, and by article 17 of the European Regulation for the protection of personal data (Gdpr).
The Dla Piper law firm calculates it by adding up the fines issued for failing to comply with the data protection rules of the GDPR. And that’s just the beginning
De-indexing is not removing
According to Costa, “until now, de-indexing was left to the discretion of the subject to whom it was requested”. Adds the deputy of Carlo Calenda’s party: “Making the provision specific to judicial proceedings means saying that the State, with its own law, recognizes that if the person is found to be innocent, information on his or her proceedings loses public interest and de-indexation is justified”.
.
[ad_2]
Source link
