Freedom of expression inherently includes the right to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas. As information is spread and shared under the principle of freedom of expression, a person invoking the right to be forgotten is requesting the deletion of certain thoughts or information. In cases of a conflict between these two rights, the issue of how to draw the line and establish a balance comes to the forefront. On one hand, there is an individual’s interest in the right to be forgotten, while on the other hand, there may be the interest of others in accessing and disseminating that information. This situation may sometimes require consideration beyond mere interests, focusing on the protection of human dignity. Since the right to be forgotten is not an absolute right, it emphasizes the necessity of case-by-case evaluation when determining the limits of freedom of expression in each specific situation. Another significant issue regarding this topic is the potential conflict between the right to be forgotten and the freedom of the press, which is essential in a democratic society. In a democratic society, the press has an obligation to report news in the public interest, and society, in turn, has the right to receive information and news. In today’s digital age, the internet, which facilitates both freedom of expression and freedom of the press, also creates a platform for frequent conflicts between these rights.
Another important issue in this context is the identity of the person requesting the right to be forgotten. It is a fact that individuals who are well-known in society, such as public figures, often come to the forefront in requests for the right to be forgotten. When evaluating the right to be forgotten, a distinction is often made between ordinary citizens and public figures, politicians, civil servants, and individuals playing roles in public life. In fact, this distinction is frequently made even between politicians and other public figures. In cases involving politicians, when evaluating the balance between the right to be forgotten and freedom of expression and the press, if there is a conflict of values, the balance may often lean in favor of freedom of expression. On the other hand, when it comes to public officials, they are given more protection against attacks on their personal rights compared to politicians. In the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) case *Lesnik v. Slovakia*, the Court did not view the Slovak government’s intervention to protect the reputation of a regional prosecutor as a violation of rights. This indicates that a public official’s personality and reputation are not as important as the public’s trust in the official’s duties, which is essential for democratic society.[1] When the ECHR evaluates individuals such as public figures, artists, or others in the media spotlight, it considers factors like the truth of the news, the method of information gathering, the prominence of the person targeted, the public interest of the topic, and the content, form, and consequences of the publication.[2] In the *Feldek v. Slovakia* case, the ECHR protected a statement about a politician’s fascist past published in an interview under freedom of expression.[3] When discussing the relationship between the right to be forgotten and freedom of the press, it is also important to consider whether the statement in the media is an expression of a value judgment or a factual report. While it is possible to prove whether an event is current or has occurred, it is clear that proving a value judgment may not always be possible. Opinions and thoughts based on no data could be considered excessive if they contain value judgments.
Attorney Yalçın TORUN
[1] http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-60974 (Access Date: 01.10.2020)
[2] Doğru, Atilla, p.240.
[3] DOĞRU, ATİLLA, p.208.
© 2025 Torun Law Firm – All Rights Reserved.
This article is protected under the provisions of the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works (No. 5846). The content, in whole or in part, may not be copied, reproduced, published, or shared on any other website without the prior written permission of the author and Torun Law Firm.
This material may only be shared by licensed attorneys, for professional purposes, without any modifications, and with full attribution to the author and the source.
Any unauthorized use may result in legal and criminal liability.