This guide focuses on how a publisher should decide when an archive request arrives. The legal bases of such requests and the “right to be forgotten” debate are dealt with in the right to be forgotten guide.
Start with the right question
When an archive request arrives the question is not “should we remove it” but “what level of intervention is sufficient”. Article 24/2 of the Civil Code justifies an attack on personality rights by consent, a superior private or public interest, or the exercise of a power conferred by law. Public interest may diminish over time; but its falling to zero, so as to require deletion of the whole item, is a separate assessment.
Five options, in ascending order
| # | Intervention | What it does | When appropriate |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Update note | The item stays; what followed is added (a decision not to prosecute, an acquittal, a correction) | Where the process has since changed — the right answer most often |
| 2 | Adding the reply text | The person’s own text appears beside the item | Where an Article 14 request has been made — already mandatory |
| 3 | Anonymisation | The name and identifying details are removed; the item stays | Where the public interest lies in the event, not the person |
| 4 | De-indexing | The item stays on the site but not in search results | Where appearing first in search results is the real harm |
| 5 | Removal | The content is taken down entirely | Where there is a court order or the content is unlawful |
Why an update note is usually the right answer
Most archive requests arise not because the item is wrong but because it is incomplete: it recorded that proceedings were brought against a person, but not that they were acquitted. Deleting the item does not inform the reader; an update note does.
Article 25(1) of the Civil Code allows a claimant to seek a declaration of the unlawfulness of an attack “whose effects continue, even if it has ended”. An update note is the most direct way of removing the continuing effect.
What to do instead of deleting
- Add a dated update note beneath the item and make it visible.
- Publish the development as a separate item as well, and link the two.
- Publish any reply text the person has sent, as Article 14 of Law No. 5187 requires.
- Record in the archive when and why the change was made.
- Keep a copy of the original text in the internal archive.
Cases where the law compels action
In some content there is no discretion, and keeping it in the archive is itself an infringement:
- Identity bans. Content disclosing the identity of, or enabling the recognition of, offenders and victims under eighteen, and victims of sexual offences (Law No. 5187, Art. 21).
- The content of a closed hearing. It may not be published by any means of communication (CPC Art. 187/2).
- Content a court has ordered to be removed.
- Disclosure relating to private life. Content falling within Article 134/2 of the Criminal Code.
The data protection dimension
An archived item also contains personal data. How obligations under Law No. 6698 interact with the exemption granted to journalistic activity is dealt with in the journalism exemption guide and the personal data guide.
A workflow for handling requests
- Record the request with its date and time.
- Ask what it rests on: which legal ground, is there a court order?
- Re-read the item: is the content accurate, has the process since changed?
- Assess whether the public interest still exists today.
- Start with the lightest of the five options.
- Record your decision and its reasons in writing.
- Reply to the requester; silence pushes the matter into court.
How limitation works for the archive
Under Article 72 of Law No. 6098 a claim for compensation is barred after two years from the date the injured party became aware of the damage and of the person liable, and in any event ten years from the date of the act; where the compensation arises from an act requiring a penalty for which the criminal laws provide a longer period, that period applies. How those periods run in relation to content that remains accessible in an archive is argued on the facts, so take advice on older requests as well.