CYIL vol. 12 (2021)

CYIL 12 (2021) THE GLOBAL REACH OF THE RIGHT TO BE FORGOTTEN THROUGH THE LENSES … 7. Conclusion The CNIL judgment cannot be considered as a reduction in the level of data protection and a refusal of the global application of the right to be forgotten. On the contrary, it allows for the further worldwide application of the right to be forgotten and becomes a step towards adapting the EU data protection law to the reality of the global Internet. This is an attempt to develop progressive case law to protect human rights in the digital age. The right to be forgotten is increasingly faced with the issue of jurisdictional boundaries, and the CNIL case does not exhaust this issue and does not reduce the likelihood of further litigation regarding the scope of the right to be forgotten. In addition to setting limits on the territorial scope of the right to be forgotten, the CNIL case is significant in that it paved the way for global coverage. From the EU’s point of view, extraterritorial enforcement of the EU’s digital rights, in particular the right to be forgotten, is seen as a way guaranteeing the full protection of human rights. Nevertheless, developing rules for the protection of digital privacy in the context of balancing these two approaches, rather than opting for one of them, is the best way forward to ensure that privacy remains a protected right, even in the digital age. This position is expressed by the solution under consideration. Therefore, the interpretation of the judgment of the CNIL case as a territorial restriction of the right to be forgotten cannot be considered correct. Rather, it was the first attempt to balance the local and global application of the right to be forgotten.

211