Skip to main content

Argentina: The Right to Be Forgotten

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law ((GSCL,volume 40))

Abstract

There is neither specific Argentine legislation guaranteeing the right to be forgotten nor specific remedies for infringement of such a right. Argentina finds similar values and protections in the constitutional rights of privacy and dignity, but has not followed the ECJ ruling in the Google Spain case in accordance with the European approach to the right to be forgotten.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Argentine Constitution, articles 18, 19, 33 & 43; Personal Data Protection Law 25.326.

  2. 2.

    Argentina’s Constitution provides, when it incorporates the human rights treaties mentioned in article 72, subsection 22, that those provisions acquire constitutional status, meaning that in case of conflict judges must declare the unconstitutionality of the national laws.

  3. 3.

    American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, article 5 (“Every person has the right to the protection of the law against abusive attacks upon his honor, his reputation, and his private and family life.”); Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 12 (“No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.”); International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, article 17 (“No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.”); American Convention on Human Rights, article 11, para. 2 (“No one may be the object of arbitrary or abusive interference with his private life, his family, his home, or his correspondence, or of unlawful attacks on his honor or reputation.”).

  4. 4.

    UN Council on Human Rights, “Promotion, Protection and Enjoyment of Human Rights on Internet,” June 29th 2012; Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights “Freedom of Expression and the Internet.” June 1st 2011.

  5. 5.

    Argentina Supreme Court of Justice, “Rodríguez, María Belén c/Google Inc. s/daños y perjuicios”, sentence of the 28th October 2014.

  6. 6.

    The Supreme Court followed the ruling of the case Rodríguez in subsequent cases (Argentina Supreme Court of Justice, such as“Da Cunha, Virginia c/ Yahoo de Argentina S.R.L. Y otro s/ daños y perjuicios”, and “Lorenzo, Bárbara cl Google Inc. si daños y perjuicios”, sentences of the 30th December 2014).

  7. 7.

    Argentina Supreme Court of Justice, “Rodríguez, María Belén c/Google Inc. s/daños y perjuicios”, sentence of the 28th October 2014, parag.17.

  8. 8.

    The Supreme Court has recalled in the Rodriguez case that any restriction or limitation on free expression should be interpreted restrictively and that all censorship has a strong presumption of unconstitutionality.

  9. 9.

    City of Buenos Aires, Juzgado Contencioso Administrativo y Tributario de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires N°18, Secretaria N° 36 [Court of first instance] “GIL DOMÍNGUEZ ANDRÉS FAVIO CONTRA DIRECCIÓN GENERAL DE DEFENSA Y PROTECCIÓN DEL CONSUMIDOR DEL GCBA S/AMPARO”,Expte.A352-2014/0, sentence of October 10th 2014. Press release: http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1736360-el-derecho-al-olvido-en-internet-se-debera-aplicar-tambien-en-la-capital-federal.

  10. 10.

    The protocol could not be implemented because the ruling was reversed on appeal.

  11. 11.

    Argentine Constitution, article 43 and Personal Data Protection Law 25.326.

  12. 12.

    Basterra M, “Definiendo el alcance y los límites de la responsabilidad de los buscadores de Internet.” http://marcelabasterra.com.ar/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/DEFINIENDO_EL_ALCANCE_Y_LOS_LIMITES_DE_LA_RESPONSABILIDAD_DE_LOS_BUSCADORES_EN_INTERNET.pdfhttps://es.scribd.com/document/247961027/Articulo-LA-LEY-Responsabilidad-de-los-buscadores-de-Internet-Marcela-Basterra-pdf/.

  13. 13.

    Argentine National Civil and Commercial Code, article 52.

  14. 14.

    Basterra M, “Definiendo el alcance y los límites de la responsabilidad de los buscadores de Internet.

  15. 15.

    In the Rodriguez case the Supreme Court quoted the legislation about internet intermediaries’ liability of Portugal, Brasil, United States, Canada, Italy, United Kingdom and Spain.

  16. 16.

    Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, “Guidelines on the implementarion of the cour of justice of the european union judgment on “Google Spain and Inc v. Agencia Espanola de Proteccion de Datos (AEPD) and Mario Costeja González” C/131/12”, Adopted on November 26th 2014. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/opinion-recommendation/files/2014/wp225_en.pdf.

  17. 17.

    Manila Principles on Intermediary Liability, Best Practices Guidelines for Limiting Intermediary Liability for Content to Promote Freedom of Expression and Innovation, March 24th 2015, Principle VI. Available at: https://www.manilaprinciples.org/.

  18. 18.

    The protocol could not be implemented because the ruling was reversed on appeal.

  19. 19.

    Draft Law Number 7989-D-2014. Available at: http://www1.hcdn.gov.ar/proyxml/expediente.asp?fundamentos=si&numexp=7989-D-2014.

  20. 20.

    Draft Law Number 7379-D-2014. Available at: http://www1.hcdn.gov.ar/proyxml/expediente.asp?fundamentos=si&numexp=7379-D-2014.

  21. 21.

    Basterra M, “Definiendo el alcance y los límites de la responsabilidad de los buscadores de Internet.

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Judge Marcelo López Alfonsín .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Alfonsín, J.M.L. (2020). Argentina: The Right to Be Forgotten. In: Werro, F. (eds) The Right To Be Forgotten. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 40. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33512-0_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33512-0_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-33511-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-33512-0

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics