This is an good article, about Google's so called, 'public interest' argument, for not removing links

https://arighttobeforgotten.co.uk/expertise/shpo-and-a-right-to-be-forgotten

"An argument by Google, to refuse to delist articles about your criminal conviction, because you are still subject to SHPO, could be overcome by the very existence of the SHPO. This is why:

Having an SHPO in place, means that the public interest is being protected by the SHPO, and therefore having links to articles, relating to the criminal conviction, adds nothing to the public protection.

The links only serve as an additional punishment of the offender."

https://arighttobeforgotten.co.uk/services/right-to-be-forgotten-sex-offence-delisting

That may well be part of it, but given the problems experienced by another Forum user, I suspect that they look at the date the conviction would have become spent in England (where their office is) and go by that, regardless of whether the conviction is actually spent. Of course, that could well relate back to the category of offence.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

Six years ago I was convicted of downloading indecent images and given a 1 year suspended sentence and 10 years SHPO and 10 years on the SOR. This was reported in the local press and was picked up by a couple of vigilante sites who copied and pasted the story along with photos they took from my then Facebook account. Six years on I have managed to get the SHPO dismissed so my offence is now classed as spent. If you Google my name now the original newspaper story no longer appears as it has been archived (yesterdays news) but links to a vigilante site called Track Em Down (TED) do still appear so I put is a request to Google asking for these links to my name to be removed as my conviction was over six years ago and is now spent and my SHPO has been dismissed.
They replied with their standard template rejection letter saying it was still in the public interest for links to this vigilante website to be linked to my name. I then contacted the ICO explaining that my conviction is now sprint and that a crown court judge had dismissed my SHPO five years early having read reports on my rehabilitation from the police and the probation service and that the vigilante site in question encourages vigilante action against people identified on their site so I could be in danger of attack and that I was finding it hard to find employment as most employers these days google the names of applicants to see what kind of social media presence they have and  they can find out about my spent conviction which legally they have no right to know about. Three months later I received a reply saying that the ICO agree with Googles decision and are going to take no action. I can only conclude that if you raise a concern with the ICO and you are a SO they don't even bother to look into it  (you get everything you deserve)