Page URL:

Scrap retention of innocent people's DNA

10 October 2011
Appeared in BioNews 628

Plans to introduce broad powers to allow police to retain the DNA of innocent people should be abandoned, the UK Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) has said.

Under the proposed Protection of Freedoms Bill, DNA information obtained from suspects not cautioned or convicted will be kept and destroyed after five years. According to the Home Secretary, Theresa May, this would remove the names of nearly one million innocent people from the UK DNA database. The Bill, however allows police to retain DNA information of those not convicted of any crime, in order to protect national security.

In its report on the Bill, the JCHR stated that these powers 'create a broad catch-all discretion for police to authorise the retention of material indefinitely for reasons of national security'.

'We are concerned that the minister has not provided a justification of why this power is necessary and proportionate, particularly, in light of specific measures targeted towards retention to counter-terrorism and immigration', the report said. 'Without further justification or additional safeguards, these measures should be removed from the Bill'.

The Home Office justified the stance the Government has taken, stating that national security is 'the first duty of any government'.

'Where DNA needs to be retained on national security grounds it will have to be approved by the independent Biometric Commissioner, which will provide a strong safeguard', a spokesperson for the Home Office said.

'The last Government kept the DNA of innocent people but didn’t even bother taking it from prisoners. We’re going to take samples from the guilty and get rid of them when people have done nothing wrong'.

Currently, all DNA samples taken from suspects in England and Wales are kept indefinitely, even if a person is innocent. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled in 2008 that this amounted to a disproportionate interference with the individual's right to privacy. The Government introduced the Bill to comply with this ruling. Under the new Bill, which is going through its final stages in the House of Commons, DNA information collected from people convicted or cautioned following an offence will still be kept indefinitely.

Call to scrap DNA retention measure
Press Association |  7 October 2011
European Court of Human Rights |  4 December 2008
MPs: police should not keep DNA of the innocent
Independent |  7 October 2011
Protection of Freedoms Bill 2010-11
UK Parliament |  27 January 2022
Right to private life 'at risk’ in plan to store DNA of innocent people
Telegraph |  7 October 2011
10 June 2013 - by Ruth Retassie 
The US Supreme Court has ruled that the police are allowed to collect DNA from people they arrest...
26 March 2012 - by Dr Marianne Kennedy 
Officials in New York State in the USA have passed a bill requiring people convicted of almost any crime to provide a sample for the state's DNA database. While generally lauded, the move has attracted criticism from civil rights groups who claim that constitutional privacy issues are raised by the government holding so many people's genetic information on file...
27 February 2012 - by Jessica Ware 
Collecting DNA samples from adults arrested in California will remain legal, after a federal appeals court ruled last Thursday that Proposition 69, the measure behind the practice, was lawful....
27 February 2012 - by Ruth Saunders 
In July 2011, the US Department of Health and Human Services (DHSS) announced its plans to improve the rules governing the protection of human subjects in research, after admitting current regulations were 'developed years ago'...
31 October 2011 - by Jessica Ware 
Google has joined forces with Californian start-up company, DNAnexus, to maintain a public DNA database online. The move follows an announcement by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) that it may have to withdraw funding from the current public database, the Sequence Read Archive (SRA), due to funding cuts....
26 September 2011 - by Professor Sandy Raeburn 
First, here is the bad news. Readers attracted by this title are in for a stormy and depressing journey. The writing, both in choice of language and sentence construction, is turgid. The problems of 'plain English' start in the six-page introduction, reach a low point in the ethical chapter and only improve slightly in the legal section...
1 June 2010 - by Dr Lux Fatimathas 
The DNA of up to four million newborn babies is being stored in UK hospitals without proper parental consent....
23 November 2009 - by Gozde Zorlu 
Over-the-counter paternity tests have become available in more pharmacies across the UK, despite concerns being raised about the dangers of making this information available without medical supervision. Last week 'International Bioscience', a leading DNA analysis company, began marketing its paternity testing service to the UK through 'Clockwork pharmacies'. The UK's first over-the-counter paternity tests went on sale in pharmacies earlier this year, marketed by the company 'Anglia DNA ', spa...
22 May 2006 - by Dr John Gillott 
Human rights, privacy and medical research', a new report published by the Genetic Interest Group, traces the impact that the right to privacy is having on the regulation of medical research and clinical practice, with a particular focus on implications for human genetics. Less than 15 years ago, English law...
to add a Comment.

By posting a comment you agree to abide by the BioNews terms and conditions

Syndicate this story - click here to enquire about using this story.