When a person is charged with a crime, their name makes headlines. But when those charges are dropped, the story doesn’t disappear it lingers online, sometimes forever. And in the age of search engines, that lingering shadow can destroy reputations, careers, and even physical safety.
This is exactly what Canada’s federal privacy commissioner, Philippe Dufresne, is grappling with in his battle against Google. He has ruled that individuals should, in limited circumstances, have the right to have outdated or unfairly harmful information delisted from search results for their names. Google, however, is refusing to comply.
The case at hand involves a Canadian who faced a criminal charge that was ultimately dropped. Despite their innocence, articles about the charge still appear prominently whenever someone searches their name. The result? Social stigma, lost job opportunities, and even physical assault. The commissioner rightly concluded that this ongoing harm outweighs any public interest in keeping those search results tied to that individual’s name.
It’s important to note: the commissioner isn’t asking Google to erase history. The articles remain online, fully accessible to anyone searching for the topic. What’s at stake is whether a person should be forever defined by accusations that went nowhere, simply because of how search engines organize information.
Google’s resistance here is troubling. In 2023, the Federal Court of Appeal rejected Google’s arguments and confirmed that Canada’s privacy laws apply to its search engine. That should have settled the matter. Yet Google continues to drag its feet, treating compliance with Canadian law as optional.
The broader principle at stake is whether individuals in Canada can ever truly move on from their past, or whether the internet will permanently anchor them to moments that don’t reflect who they are. The commissioner has outlined a sensible balance: information can remain online, but not at the top of a name search if it poses a serious risk to someone’s dignity or safety.
Other jurisdictions, like the European Union, already recognize a “right to be forgotten.” Canada is not pushing for a blanket right to scrub the internet it’s seeking a reasonable safeguard against real harm.
If we believe in fairness, redemption, and the basic dignity of individuals, then this right should not only exist, but it should be enforceable. Google should not be above Canadian law. And Canadians should not have to live forever under the weight of accusations that were never proven.
