Get a free audit
MenuHomeAbout UsServicesPrivacy & Legal ServicesCrisis Management ServicesReputation MonitoringSearch Suppression ServicesReview Removal ServicesContent Removal ServicesExplicit Content Removal ServicesAI Search ReputationInternationalIndustryLegal & Law FirmsEducation & Professional ServicesTechnology, SaaS & IT CompaniesHealth Care & Medical ProfessionalsReal Estate & Property DealersHospitality & Consumer BusinessesFinance, Banking & InsuranceE-commerce, Retail & Consumer BrandsHealthcareLaw FirmsReal EstateHospitalityEducationE-commerceFinance and InsuranceTechnology and SaaSPricingContact UsBlogCase Studies Get a free audit

Right to Be Forgotten Around the World: A Country Comparison

Right to be forgotten by country: a 2026 comparison

There is no single global “right to be forgotten”. The phrase means different things in different countries, and in some places it hardly exists at all. This guide compares how the main markets treat requests about old or harmful content online, so you can understand what the law may and may not offer. It is general information as of October 2026, not legal advice.

New to the topic? Start with our explainer on what the right to be forgotten means, and see what it does and doesn’t cover.

What “right to be forgotten” can mean

  • A right to erasure of personal data. Under the EU and UK GDPR, people can ask organizations to erase their personal data in certain situations.
  • Delisting from search results. The page stays online, but a search engine may stop showing it for searches on your name. Whether this is available depends on the country.
  • Protection against false or harmful content. Defamation, harassment and online safety laws can apply to specific content, whatever the country’s approach to erasure.

Country comparison

Country or regionMain lawsGeneral right to be forgotten?Key limits and our guide
European Union (including Ireland, France, the Netherlands)GDPR, Article 17 (right to erasure)Yes, in defined situationsFreedom of expression, journalism, public interest and legal duties can outweigh it. See our guides for Ireland, France and the Netherlands.
United KingdomUK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018Yes, similar to the EUJournalism and public interest are weighed against it. UK guide.
United StatesNo federal right. Some state privacy laws, such as California’sNo general rightThe First Amendment and Section 230 limit what can be required of publishers and platforms. US guide.
CanadaPIPEDA and provincial privacy lawsNot settledWhether search results can be delisted has been considered by regulators and courts, and the position is still developing. Canada guide.
AustraliaPrivacy Act 1988 and the Online Safety Act 2021No general rightReform of privacy law has been under discussion. Australia guide.
New ZealandPrivacy Act 2020 and the Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015No general rightAimed at seriously harmful communications. New Zealand guide.
SingaporePDPA and the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA), plus harassment and defamation lawNo general rightTargets specific harms rather than general deletion. Singapore guide.
South AfricaPOPIALimited rights over personal informationPress regulation and free expression also apply. South Africa guide.
United Arab EmiratesFederal Decree-Law 45 of 2021 (PDPL) and the cybercrime lawLimitedStrict defamation and cybercrime rules mean caution is needed. UAE guide.
BrazilLGPDCase by caseThe Supreme Federal Court held in 2021 that a general right to be forgotten does not fit the Constitution. Brazil guide.
MexicoFederal Law on the Protection of Personal Data Held by Private Parties (2025)No settled general rightThe Supreme Court limited a Mexico City provision in 2022. Mexico City guide.
IndiaDigital Personal Data Protection Act 2023Right to erase personal data, being phased inExceptions and phased rules mean the practical effect is still emerging.

Limits that apply almost everywhere

  • Freedom of expression and the public interest. Accurate reporting on matters of public interest is far more likely to stay online.
  • Who controls the content. A publisher, a platform or a search engine each has its own rules and decisions.
  • Jurisdiction. Many platforms are based in other countries, which limits what a local law can do in practice.
  • The facts of your case. Outcomes depend on the content, the context and the people involved, so nobody can honestly guarantee one.

What this means in practice

Where the law offers little, many people focus on what appears when someone searches their name: building accurate, current and credible content so it appears first. We explain how this works in our guide to search suppression, and the difference between the two approaches in removal vs. suppression. If more than one country is involved, see our international hub.

For legal advice about your rights in a particular country, speak to a qualified lawyer there. We are not a law firm, and we do not promise outcomes.

Primary sources

Laws change and courts interpret them. Check the current text or ask a qualified local lawyer before relying on any summary here.

How to cite this comparison

Remove Negative Articles, “Right to Be Forgotten by Country: A 2026 Comparison”, https://removenegativearticles.com/right-to-be-forgotten-by-country-comparison/. Last reviewed October 2026. You are welcome to link to this page; please keep the “general information, not legal advice” note when you quote it.

General information as of October 2026, not legal advice. Laws change, so check the current position with a qualified local lawyer.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

WhatsApp
Removal Bot