Human rights ruling forces examination of DNA policy
Tuesday 17th November 2009, 2:29PM GMT.
INDEFINITE holding by the Guernsey Police of DNA profiles of innocent people will be reviewed, the Home minister has confirmed.
Deputy Geoff Mahy said his department and the police would clarify the issue after any changes to UK law came into force.
UK ministers announced this week that they would be looking to change the law to allow the police to hold DNA samples taken from people subsequently proved to be innocent of any crime for six years only.
However, those suspected of terrorist activities will be exempt and their DNA held permanently.
The move came after a Guernsey-born lawyer made international headlines by winning a European Court ruling which said the system in the UK breached basic human rights.
Detective Chief Inspector Peter Dowding confirmed that Guernsey Police currently retain indefinitely a DNA sample from anyone charged with an offence. He said they had been monitoring the UK situation.
As at 28 April this year, Guernsey Police held DNA from 3,440 people.
‘One has to bear in mind that this figure does not relate solely to persons who have been charged,’ said DCI Dowding. ‘Some are from persons who have provided DNA on a voluntary basis and who have no objections to their DNA remaining on the database.’
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Island Life
All about Guernsey
Ambassador of the Year 2011
History & Heritage
Visitor Information
Guernsey's government
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
Useful Links
Why not have the whole population`s DNA on file.
Will make the Police`s job easier (example the drug case in Press on monday).
If you are innocent and not a criminal no problem.
Report abuse
I quite agree, Andy.
Why not take a person’s DNA when they are born?
I just don’t understand this ‘human rights’ stuff about removing DNA from the records after a certain period of time.
M
Report abuse
@andy & Mike P
Ha Ha Ha, very funny. You guys make me laugh. ‘Human Rights’ are what ensured you guys could go to school or express yourselves on this forum (to an extent).
Would you guys allow CCTV cameras into your homes? If you are not criminals what’s the problem?
Report abuse
Quite right Dean. What guarantee would we have that such information wouldn’t be abused by a future government?
Report abuse
Ah the old “if you’ve got nothing to hide you’ve nothing to fear” line.
Spot on Dean. Indeed, why not have cameras in your house and car (in case you use your mobile etc.) and while your at it have everyone’s fingerprints and retinal scans on file too?
Because, obviously, this stuff never ever get’s lost or left on a train. Does it?
Report abuse
Give the goverment your DNA, make it simple for them, so they can use it for their own good purposes.
Why waste money providing medical treatment now, if they can see that you are going to cost them more money down the line, or you going to have incurable disease, when they check your DNA profile out.
Report abuse
I don’t think anyone would consider a comprehensive DNA database the same as CCTV cameras in every home; let’s be reasonable.
Imagine the number of unsolved crimes suddenly detected if every persons DNA was suddenly at the disposal of the Crime Detection Services. Just think how much easier the job of the Police and Customs would be.
And while we’re getting everyone’s DNA, let’s give them all ID cards too.
I’m not planning to break the law, but I would find it reassuring to know if anyone broke the law and I became a victim, the Police would have this added tool to catch the offender.
Report abuse
@Final Thought
But why do I deserve to be treated like a suspect even though I am a law abiding citizen, by having my DNA profile in the hands of the government.
I’m sorry but there are far greater implications than just protecting you from crime (as others have pointed out).
Do you really feel any government is trustworthy with such information?
Report abuse
I say there should be a world DNA database which all security agencies can access. Give DNA at birth and away you go.
What’s the worst that can happen, they clone you :))
Report abuse
And so it begins…
Report abuse
There used to be a time when we were all considered to be innocent until proven guilty. The onus was on the prosecutor to find evidence of wrongdoing when a crime had been committed.
A DNA database subtly changes that. Evidence is taken from the innocent in anticipation of future wrongdoing.
Why does it matter?
Because slowly but surely these measures (along with biometric passports, CCTV surveilance on every street corner and a host of other intrusive initiatives) gradually erode our ability to exist as free human beings. This is not about protecting us, it is about contol of society and thereby control of us as individuals.
The argument that “if you are innocent you have nothing to hide” misses the point – if you are innocent the authorities have no business gethering information on you.
Report abuse
DNA and Fingerprints should only be held if you are found guilty. Hypocritical Politicians would gladly place cameras in everyones house except their own of course.
Report abuse
I do understand the desire to remain anonymous to the authorities – as we all love the idea of being ‘free’ and rulers of our own destiny.
However, sadly, so many people take advantage of our free society, and they use their anonymity to allow them to commit crimes ranging from anti-social behaviour, to rape, murder and terrorism.
There is no doubt that if we all had our DNA and fingerprints on a database it would be much much harder for some criminals. So the question is: are we, the public, prepared to play our part in making life difficult for villains? Personally, I am. Take my DNA and fingerprints – I have nothing to hide, and I will do my bit to narrow the net without hesitation.
Report abuse
OK so think about it like this: What if in 10/20/50 years time we find ourselves with government that is less than trustworthy, tyrannical and unfair. You guys would not be able to act against it because they would have your DNA/fingerprints and could easily lock you up. Get my point?
It is about more than catching a few criminals, and those that agree with the idea of governments having this information are either very naive, ignorant or stupid.
Report abuse
Dean,
Using your rationale, let’s do away with police & prisons. If in 10/20/50 years time we have a tyrannical government they might get the police to arbitrarily lock us up and keep us in prison indefinitely when we haven’t done anything wrong. A ridiculous suggestion isn’t it.
I think it is you who is being rather naive, ignorant and stupid by using such a poor argument.
Report abuse
my DNA is noboby else’s business, as are my finger prints and so on.if i do something wrong pursue me, but until then leave me alone.no amount of security will prevent bad things happening,some people are just wicked.but i do not trust the authorities to keep securely or use appropriately my details so the less they have of them the better.
Report abuse
The point I making is about how much control we give governments over our lives. Yes we may be able to trust the authorities today (to an extent) but maybe not in the future.
With DNA profiling the governments could decide certain people are ineligible to have children or have access to health care, amongst other things.
The UK has a fairly large DNA database and yet has a much higher crime rate than countries with small or no database, therefore it appears not to be a deterrent to repeat offenders. Also it would cost a fair amount of money to set this database up, I would rather see the money invested in policing.
Also, isn’t it a little disturbing to swab every baby born into this world because they are a potential criminal?
@Truth Man, yes it was a poor argument, thanks for pointing it out. I will accept stupid, but would you mind explaining how I am naive and ignorant?
Report abuse
I am not a conspiracy theorist but it is not “naive, ignorant and stupid” to realise that if there was a DNA database containing everybody’s details, policing would be reduced to simply matching DNA to the database. Why gather any further evidence?
If the police and the courts are simply used to catching, prosecuting and convicting people based on a single question of whether a blood/hair/spit sample from the scene of the crime matches the accused’s DNA on the database, then the transparent nature of our judicial system disappears. None of us would know whether the DNA match is correct or not. We would have to trust the accuracy of the system and the benign nature of those that apply it. That is a lot of power to place in the hands of the State. And absolute power corrupts absolutely. It would be a big temptation for the State to simply adjust the system to remove people that it considers dangerous.
Are we willing to grant the State that power? Do we trust the State to use that power without interfering with the science?
The argument of “if you are not a criminal you have nothing to fear” is naive, ignorant and stupid – you only need to look at regimes through history which had the ability to control their judicial systems to see examples of blatent miscarriages of justice. A DNA database would allow that control to exerted silently and behind the scenes. I would not trust any modern state to avoid the temptation to do so at least once in a while.
Report abuse
Easy..
Commit a crime, get put on the database.
Its your own fault.
Report abuse
Without the innocent until proven guilty principle we are not a democracy. The amusing phrase “If u dun nuffink ron wots de problem” sums it up!
In the UK you can go to prison for murder just by being in the vicinity. It still hasnt stopped the endless stabbings check out Joint Enterprise.
Generally the more hypocritical the establishment the more draconian the laws.
Report abuse
Except, The Man, the point is that there are thousands of people on theses databases who have not committed any crime.
Report abuse
Dean : I was paraphrasing your previous post, and that is all. Please don’t take it personally.
TL :
Your theory has already been disproven by the progression of science and technology. Additional evidential capture processes merely add to the investigators tool kit. There is no evidence whatsoever that when a new process is introduced, traditional methods get forgotten. Quite the opposite in fact.
And in reference to the suggestion that our regime might abuse the additional ‘power’ – again there is no evidence to support that. The UK Government and The States already hold a phenomenal amount of information on us, and they introduced a number of pieces of legislation to protect us. Show me how they have abused that position. To clarify, I am referring to how corporately your information has been used amounting to an abuse, and not referring to the individuals who have lost or stolen data from the Governments or their quangos.
Report abuse
@Truth Man, don’t worry I’m not offended, just curious.
To clarify, your argument is: the government has not misused the data they have on the population in the past, so therefore will not in the future?
Although I find your optimism refreshing, I have to say I disagree.
Report abuse
Dean:
Well, sort of. My point is that there is no evidence that I am aware of that there is a trend towards the authorities abusing our personal data – in fact the opposite is true in that they have introduced legislation and departments to ensure that doesn’t happen.
I feel that your original arguement, about the possibility of future governments abusing our data, is a little alarmist. Like I said before, there are lots of things we currently have in place that we don’t worry about future governments abusing; police, courts, prisons, laws – the list goes on.
If we use your rationale, then in fact, a future extremist government might introduce the legislation anyway – let’s face it, they will be allowed to do whatever they want. If you think about it, a future Government might decide to change our whole constitution and alter what we call democracy and there would be NOTHING any one of us could do about it. Providing them with a DNA database at this stage would make them no more, or less powerful or firghtening than they could be anyway.
For that reason, whilst we are not Governed by such people, we should make good use of what is a very powerful crime fighting tool.
Did I make sense?
Report abuse
@Truth Man
I’m sorry, but you cannot compare a DNA database to “police, courts, prisons, laws”. These things are fundamental to a functioning society, a DNA database certainly is not. I’m not arguing about the governments potential to abuse, but a databases potential to be abused.
And I would much rather a government take my DNA profile by force than willingly give it up under the pretence of fighting crime.
OK so maybe we might have to agree to disagree, you give a swab, and I won’t. Although DNA profiling is, as you say “a very powerful crime fighting tool”, it can also be a a powerful tool in other ways and has massive implications for society. I urge you to look at what these could be and have included a link below you may or may not like to read.
http://whereismydata.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/genewatch-uk.doc
Report abuse
TL
Yes, but forget all the grey areas and clear it right up.
Found guilty- on the databse
Not guilty- off the databse
On database incorrectly- Databse holders liable for prosecution
That would make things easier, no??
Report abuse
Dean:
I think we can compare DNA databases (and ID cards for that matter), to police, courts, prisons. In essence, they are no more or less radical or valid. The only reason you see police, courts and prisons as being fundamental to a functioning society is because we all grew up with them, and they are (sort of) accepted as being an integral part of society as a result. There are many countries who, as an example, accept ID cards in exactly the same way and the same would apply to a DNA database in the future.
I think you’re right though, we obviously see this very differently – which is a godsend, because if not these comments blogs would be as dull as dishwater!
Report abuse