Search Result or Privacy

Third Petty Bench of Supreme Court issued a decision on Wednesday to dismiss an appeal of a man who demanded deletion of his past record of being arrested on the webpage of Google. While the case attracted attention of many people, Supreme Court did not find a reason to apply “right to be forgotten,” to it. The Court realized that the deletion would be allowed only when the interest of not disclosing privacy would obviously be superior to freedom of expression in search engine.

The plaintiff was arrested in 2011 with the charge of sexual obscenity to high school girl with handing money over. The case was immediately reported in the news and appeared on webpages. Claiming that it was violation of personal right to reveal his record of being arrested by imputing his name to search engine, the man requested Google to delete the result of searching.

Supreme court recognized great role of search engine in the public, in which the people deliver and receive information, and deletion of search result would restrict activities of expression and that kind of role of search engine. In comparing freedom of expression and privacy, they focused on nature or substance of the fact, damage from disclosure of the information, social status or influence of the person demanding deletion, purpose or meaning of the report, social situation at the time and thereafter, and necessity of revealing the fact. Having raised those points, the Court denied necessity of deletion with reason of great public interest in prohibiting child prostitution.

In the lower Saitama Regional Court ordered Google to delete the search result, recognizing right to be forgotten after passing certain period of time, in December 2015. The decision was the first case for Japanese judicial system to recognize the right. But, in the appeal trial in Tokyo High Court in July 2016, the right was neglected as not acknowledged by law.

Supreme Court did not made clear decision on the right to be forgotten in the case. European Union has put the right in practice since 2006. While Google has been deleting search results violating the right in E.U., they do not in Japan where no law prohibits it. While Supreme Court recognizes Google search as an activity of expression, there is another criticism that it is simply indicating results, not expressing anything.

Here is a clear contrast: E.U. focuses on human rights and Japan on public interest. E.U. recognizes the right to be forgotten, when the purpose of disclosing the search result is lost. Japan needs to be more active on distinguishing public interest the people should know from privacy to be protected.