Right to be Forgotten: Protection or Loophole for Abuse?

Umi Khanifah Nur Hidayati

Internship

10 May 2026 · 12:53 10 May 2026 12:53 WIB 6 minutes reading time: 6 minutes 4 read

The Right to be Forgotten in the revision of the Human Rights Law is considered important to protect individuals, but is prone to being misused to whitewash track records.

Ilustrasi editorial mengenai Hak untuk Dilupakan, jejak digital, dan keseimbangan antara privasi individu dengan transparansi publik. — Ilustrasi konsep Hak untuk Dilupakan dalam revisi UU HAM yang menyoroti benturan antara perlindungan privasi individu dan hak publik untuk memperoleh informasi. (Source: AI ChatGPT, Redaksi Literasi Hukum Indonesia)

Opinion Note

This opinion article was written by a contributor/columnist. The views expressed are entirely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors.

CONTRIBUTOR PROGRAM

You can become a columnist at Legal Literacy.

Submit your legal opinion/analysis writing. If it is published, you have the opportunity to obtain a payout/honorarium in accordance with the provisions.

Submit Article Read Guidelines

Table of Contents

Plan to Insert a Special Article into the Revised Human Rights Law
The clash between the Right to be Forgotten and the Public's Right to Know
Implicitly Used Legal Basis
Analysis of the Right to be Forgotten in the Revised Human Rights Law
The Need for the State to Provide Legal Protection
Beware of Potential Abuse of Digital Footprint Removal
The Midpoint between Individual Privacy and Public Interest
Conclusion

Section 3/3: Analysis of the Right to be Forgotten in the Revised Human Rights Law

Analysis of the Right to be Forgotten in the Revised Human Rights Law

The Need for the State to Provide Legal Protection

The Right to Be Forgotten can indeed be a form of protection for someone who has previously been implicated in a case, but is not legally proven guilty. Digital footprints still often lead to prolonged stigma, even though the court has declared someone innocent. This condition can have an impact on a person's social life, work, let alone their future in the long run. The state is considered to have to provide legal protection so that a person does not continue to receive social consequences for accusations that are not proven true.

Beware of Potential Abuse of Digital Footprint Removal

The existence of regulations on the Right to be Forgotten is also inseparable from the possibility of potential abuse by certain parties, especially influential officials in the community. The deletion of digital track records related to the public interest can certainly raise new issues related to information transparency. Basically, the public has the right to know a person's track record, especially in relation to abuse of power or cases that have been in the public spotlight. Many legal experts also emphasize that the revision of the Human Rights Law must contain strict instruments and restrictions so that this right does not turn into a tool to whitewash negative track records in the digital space. [4]

The Midpoint between Individual Privacy and Public Interest

The Right to Be Forgotten could potentially clash with the public's right to know and the principle of freedom of the press if not carefully regulated. Deleting digital information is necessary to protect one's right to privacy and future. However, not all negative track records can be deleted easily, especially when the information is still related to the public interest. Therefore, what is needed is not just deleting information entirely, but a clear balance between the protection of one's privacy and the public's right to know relevant information.

Conclusion

The Right to Be Forgotten can indeed be a form of legal protection for someone who is not proven guilty so that they do not continue to be overshadowed by digital stigma in the long run. However, the existence of regulations should not ignore the public's right to obtain information, especially those related to the public interest and transparency of information from public officials. The revision of the Human Rights Law still needs to present clear and strong limits and mechanisms so that its application is not misused as a tool to whitewash negative track records. Thus, what needs to be built is not only about the protection of individual privacy, but also about the balance between personal rights and public interests in a proportional manner.