DNA database has wings clipped

THE UK MUST DELETE the DNA and fingerprint records of innocent people from its police databases, the European Court of Human Rights ordered today in a landmark ruling.

Police in England, Wales and Northern Ireland had been treating innocent people like criminals, stigmatising them, stripping them of their right to a private life, and challenging the basic right of presumption of innocence enjoyed by people in democratic societies, said the court.

It said the same of fingerprint records and "cellular samples" which were also collected by police and retained indefinitely, regardless of whether someone was innocent of any crime.

The court was ruling on the case of S Marper who was arrested for attempted robbery in January 2001 when he was 11 years old. The police dropped the charges five months later, but kept his DNA, fingerprints and cellular samples just in case he did one day turn out to be a criminal. The police could then feel Master Marper's collar using their database any time they wanted to search for culprit for another crime.

Master Marper's father's details were also retained after his partner had complained of harassment in March 2001. She dropped the charges on the day Master Marper was acquitted because they had kissed and made up. But again, police kept Mr Marper's DNA, fingerprint and cellular samples for a rainy day.

The court said that the police were interfering with father and son's "right to a private life" by retaining their records on a national database "with the aim of being permanently kept and regularly processed by automated means for criminal-identification purposes".

Is it really necessary for the police to do this in a democratic society, asked the court? Okay, there is a legitimate need for the retention of records about criminals, but most other countries in Europe delete the DNA details of suspects they discover are innocent of any crime. The Scottish parliament had decided in 2006 to outlaw the indiscriminate retention of DNA records by police on the basis of its "threat to civil liberties" and "the lack of evidence of benefit".

"England, Wales and Northern Ireland appeared to be the only jurisdictions within the Council of Europe to allow the indefinite retention of fingerprint and DNA material of any person of any age suspected of any recordable offence," said the court.

The court scolded the UK government for breaching the European Convention of Human Rights with its irresponsible use of police technology: "Article 8 of the Convention would be unacceptably weakened if the use of modern scientific techniques in the criminal-justice system were allowed at any cost," it said.

The UK also undermined human rights by failing to "carefully balance" its policing with people's private interests: "Any State claiming a pioneer role in the development of new technologies bore special responsibility for striking the right balance in this regard."

Reaction
The Liberal Democrats, who have campaigned against the injustice of the UK's DNA database, said in a statement: "There are over 850,000 people on the DNA database who have no criminal record. Since the database was created, more than a million children have been added to it, including over 340,000 who remain under 18."

Moreover, the police were maintaining the database poorly. More than 2.3 million criminals, or 41.6 per cent of all criminals with a record on the Police National Computer, were not on the DNA database.

Chris Huhne, Liberal Democrat shadow Home Secretary, said: “Because it has proved easier to target kids and the innocent than criminals, the enormous increase in DNA samples has not led to a corresponding increase in convictions. "

The number of crimes solved using DNA evidence fell by nearly 12 per cent last year, said the Libdems using information they retrieved from the government using parliamentary questions.

But neither the government or police showed any intention of obeying the court. Both said they would examine the ruling closely.

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said she was "disappointed" by the ruling: "DNA and fingerprinting is vital to the fight against crime, providing the police with more than 3,500 matches a month," she said.

The court had recognised that the DNA database was a valuable crime fighting tool. But Smith made no comment on the nub of the matter, which was the court's ruling on the records of innocent people.

Flapping
Chris Sims, Chief Constable of Staffordshire Police and the national forensics chief, conceded that DNA records did "pose ethical questions", policing relied on "public consent" and police must respect people's freedoms. But he complained that the police shouldn't have their power's "diminished".

In four years to 2005, the police linked the DNA records of 8,500 people who did not have a criminal record to "crime scene profiles" for 14,000 offences that included "114 murders, 55 attempted murders, 116 rapes, 68 sexual offences, 119 aggravated burglaries and 127 of the supply of controlled drugs".

The police have been using these same statistics for years but have never said how many of those matches had led to convictions or even charges.

The British Academy of Forensic Sciences has already warned about the dire consequences of retaining innocent people's DNA. That demonstrates how forensic chief Sims speaks in the interest of police powers and not in his capacity as a forensics expert, when he trots out his statistics. Indeed, these very statistics have been criticised by GeneWatch, a campaign group, for being false.

Dr Helen Wallace, director of GeneWatch, said today: "Today's landmark decision vindicates all those innocent people who have struggled to get their DNA destroyed".

Terri Dowty, director of Action on Rights for Children said: "The court's decision is a welcome wake-up call for Government. New legislation must give a high priority to children's privacy and rights".

Simon Davies, director of Privacy International, said: "The UK government has already stretched the limits of what should be permissible in a free society. The systematic exploitation of DNA data of innocent people has been a damning indication of the government's scant regard to human rights. No wonder Britain is consistently ranked as the democratic world's leading surveillance society".

See also

Cops intensify kiddy DNA sweep
Government database logs children's failures
Data chief attacks transatlantic police plan
Police fingerprint plans scuppered by network
Foreign cops ask for UK identity data