The massive scale of the controversial ‘right to be forgotten’ can be laid bare, after Google admitted that it has already been asked to take down more than a million links.

Requests have flooded in across Europe since the law came into effect last spring – some of them from killers, rapists and terrorists who want to use the European law to hide their criminal pasts.

The European Court of Justice ruled in May 2014 that Google must remove links to websites that include content that is 'inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant'.

More than 280,000 people asked Google for the controversial 'right to be forgotten' after it has taken down more than one million links

Since then, the web search giant has received more than 281,000 requests from people who wanted information about themselves to be suppressed. The requests asked for 1.1million web links to be removed – 602,000 of which have been deleted.

And there is a notable split by nationality. The French, it seems, are the most eager to hide details about their pasts, requesting the removal of more than 197,000 links over the last 13 months – equivalent to a fifth of all the requests across Europe.

The British are less likely to use the controversial ‘right to be forgotten’ online. Google has received 35,390 requests for 138,576 links to be erased since the law came into effect. However, Britons’ requests are more likely to be granted.

Google agreed to remove 63 per cent of the links flagged for removal on its UK website, compared with just 52 per cent of those on its French operation.

The Daily Mail received a request to remove a May 2009 article describing the sordid captivity in which Josef Fritzl (pictured) kept his family

Many of the requests come from ordinary people trying to erase embarrassing information from the internet, such as posts on social networks or online dating sites.

Facebook was the website which had the most links removed, followed by the social network search site Profile Engine and video sharing site YouTube.

However, the European ruling has also been hijacked by killers, sexual predators and terrorists, trying to airbrush their wrongdoing from history.

Examples of links deleted by Google include a number of Mail articles detailing issues ranging from drug abuse to incest, murder and spying.

For instance, Mail received a request to remove a May 2009 article describing the sordid captivity in which Josef Fritzl kept his family.

The piece was based on extracts from the book ‘The Crimes of Josef Fritzl: Uncovering the Truth’.

Another Mail story removed from Google concerned Ronald Castree, 61, a paedophile who abducted an 11-year old girl with learning difficulties before abusing and murdering her.

Google also removed a link to a Mail story about a teenager, Kyle Ivison, who was slapped with an Asbo for committing 40 per cent of the offences in his town.

Under the European ruling, people who have been convicted of serious crimes ‘do not have the right to be forgotten’. However, other individuals named in the articles can request the removal of any links which appear in searches for their own name.

That means that they can exploit the controversial ruling by asking any friends or family mentioned in the same article to make the request on their behalf.

Criminals who to make it harder for people to find information about them can ask their friends and family to make the right to be forgotten requests under their own names. A Google search of the criminal’s name would still lead to the article, but a Google search of the friend’s name and the criminal’s name would not.

That means that there are fewer ways to track down the information online. It also means that adding more terms to a Google does not help to narrow the results down. Instead, adding more search terms can block the information altogether.

Google has fiercely opposed the right to be forgotten before it was made law, but now has no choice but to comply.

Business Secretary Sajid Javid has also opposed the law, during his tenure as Culture Secretary. He accused ‘Luxembourg’s unelected judges’ of forcing Google to remove links to news stories.

‘Each day, a thousand requests pour in from people who, for one reason or another, would prefer their pasts to be kept secret,’ he said.

Business Secretary Sajid Javid (pictured) has also opposed the law, during his tenure as Culture Secretary

‘Criminals are having their convictions airbrushed from history even if they have since committed other, similar crimes.

‘Terrorists have ordered Google to cover up stories about their trials,’ he said.

The BBC has also complained about stories being removed, claiming that one of its reports referring to two convicted Real IRA terrorists could not be found on Google for some time.

That story appears to have been restored. The BBC has also retaliated against the European ruling by posting a single list of links to all the articles which have been erased from Google searches.

When Google removes a link under the right to be forgotten, the article is not removed from the internet altogether. However, if the web links do not appear in search engine results it is very difficult to find.

Instead, users searching for the topic on google.co.uk will see a message that says: ‘Some results may have been removed under data protection law in Europe’ at the bottom of the page.

So far the ‘right to be forgotten’ ruling only affects European versions of Google’s search operation, such as the google.co.uk website in Britain and the google.fr site in France. However, data protection watchdogs in Europe and privacy campaigners in the US are pushing to make it global.