Mother’s right to rectification regarding opinion on child’s safety Summary Our remarks Veilig Thuis, a public organization responsible for • Public organizations, such as Veilig Thuis, that deal dealing with cases or suspicions of domestic violence with cases or suspicions of domestic violence or or child abuse, received reports from a school about an child abuse may process personal data and carry 11-year-old with frequent absences. Veilig Thuis sent an out tasks in the public interest and for reasons email to the child’s mother, stating that they had made of public health. Therefore, the rules governing an agreement with the obligatory education officer to the processing of personal data, such as the be notified if the child’s safety was jeopardized again or GDPR, must be considered in conjunction with the continued to be so. The mother requested that the word applicable legislation. ”again” be removed from the email and for the entire file to be erased. Veilig Thuis rejected both requests, • The right to erasure under the GDPR is not absolute, leading the mother to bring the matter to court. and the interests of the data subject must be balanced against the interests of the controller. District Court In this specific case, the Court of Appeal found that the substantial interest of Veilig Thuis in The District Court rejected the mother’s appeal, stating maintaining the data outweighed the interest of the that Veilig Thuis had a reasonable basis to judge that mother in having it erased. Therefore, it is important the child’s substantial interest required the organization to understand that the right to erasure is not always to save the data. The Court further stated that this applicable and must be balanced against the substantial interest of saving the data outweighed the interests of all the parties involved. mother’s interest in erasing it. • Additionally, the right to rectification under the Appeal Court GDPR does not extend to correcting or removing Both the mother and Veilig Thuis appealed this impressions, opinions, research results, and decision. The Court of Appeal rejected the appeal, conclusions with which the data subject does not stating that Veilig Thuis processes personal data and agree. This means that controllers may still hold carries out a task in the public interest and for reasons personal data that is accurate and reflects their of public health. Therefore, the deletion request must be assessments and opinions, even if the data subject assessed on the basis of the Dutch Social Support Act does not agree with them. 2015. • Lastly, it is essential to consider the best interests of The decision of the Court of Appeal the child when making decisions that affect them, particularly in cases involving child welfare and The Court confirmed the District Court’s decision, protection. In some cases, the interests of the child’s stating that the substantial interest of Veilig Thuis and legal representative, such as a parent or guardian, the child outweighed the mother’s interest.* may not align with the best interests of the child. Therefore, it is crucial to prioritize the welfare of the * the case is pending before the Dutch Supreme Court. child when making decisions that could impact their safety and well-being. Published: 18-01-2022, Journal number: 200.297.497_01 Tags: 03 Right to erasure and rectificatio 36