SPECIAL COLLECTION OF THE CASE LAW ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION Overview of “de-indexation” 1. What is it? The practice of “de-indexing” refers to the removal of Uniform Resource Locator (URL) from search engines. It has been used in the context of data protection claims when users require search engines to remove a URL that appears in search results that are linked to their names. The requirements are normally submitted in reference to some content, typically a news article, that allegedly could harm the requesting party’s right to privacy or reputation. As it was mentioned, de-indexing entered the spotlight in the data protection conversation in 2014 after the CJEU’s decision in Google Spain SL v. Agencia Española de Protección de Datos and Mario Costeja. It was in this decision that the practice was framed under the phrase “right to be forgotten”. The Costeja case began in March 2010. A Spanish national named Mario Costeja-González brought a complaint before the country’s Data Protection Agency against La Vanguardia newspaper, Google Spain, and Google Inc. Costeja-González wanted the newspaper to remove or alter the record of his 1998 attachment and garnishment proceedings so that the information would no longer be available through Internet search engines. He also requested Google Inc. or its subsidiary, Google Spain, to remove or conceal the data. González argued that the proceedings had been fully resolved for several years and therefore they should no longer appear online. The It should be noted that Agency dismissed the complaint against the newsde-indexing requests and paper on the ground that the publication was legally justified pursuant to a government order. It upheld— jurisprudential discussion have however—the complaint against Google, finding that now extended beyond the Internet search engines are also subject to data proremoval of URLs. tection laws and must take necessary steps to protect personal information. On appeal, the National High Court of Spain stayed the proceedings and presented a number of questions to the CJEU concerning the applicability of the EU Directive 95/46 (protection of personal data) to the Internet search engines. The Court ruled that a search engine is regarded as a “controller” with respect to “processing” of personal data through its act of locating, indexing, storing, and disseminating such information. Additionally, it held that in order to guarantee the rights of privacy and the protection of personal data, operators of search engines can be required to remove personal information published by third party websites. But the data subject’s right to make that request must be balanced against the interest of the general public to access his or her personal information. It should be noted that de-indexing requests and jurisprudential discussion have now extended beyond the removal of URLs. As it can be seen in the case law available in the next section, several cases have now focused on removing information from official judicial files and analyzing requests submitted directly to the publisher of the information to name a few examples 6