News

Fears over future of DNA database as report calls for greater accountability

(8 November 2004)

The first systematic and authoritative study of the National DNA Database (NDNAD) of England and Wales raises serious concerns about the forthcoming privatisation of the Forensic Science Service and Government proposals that the custodianship of the database is placed in new hands.

Unless measures are taken to enhance existing levels of transparency and accountability there is a real danger that public confidence will be lost in the security, privacy and handling of sensitive personal information held by the police.

Today’s report written by Robin Williams and Paul Johnson (University of Durham), and Paul Martin (University of Nottingham) and funded by the Wellcome Trust, is the first independent, systematic and authoritative study of the many social, legal and ethical issues raised by police uses of the National DNA database of England and Wales.

The database is the largest investigative resource of its kind in the world containing more than 2 million profiles taken from individuals suspected of involvement in a recordable offence.

In addition to considering the effectiveness of police uses of the database, the report also focuses on the difficult ethical issues that arise from the collection and retention of human tissue samples and profiles taken from widening groups of individuals. It also discusses the potential future developments in DNA profiling and databasing and their role in preventing, detecting and reducing crime.

The most contentious aspect of the current uses of the NDNAD is the new power to retain and continuously speculatively search the DNA profiles of innocent people who have never been charged with a recordable offence.

The report calls for urgent legal and political consideration of this practice saying that there need to be clearly developed principles and strong evidence-based justifications if it is to be continued especially when there is constant innovation in the analysis and uses of DNA in support of criminal investigations.

Furthermore, the indefinite retention of the biological samples from which profiles are obtained raises concerns about the control of such sensitive genetic information in the future.

Robin Williams, lead author of the study comments: “This is the latest in a series of piecemeal changes that threaten to destabilise the delicate balance between public security and individual freedom in the collection and use of genetic information“.

The Report strongly recommends the creation of an independent oversight body to scrutinise the workings of the NDNAD and that all new applications of forensic DNA profiling are fully informed by knowledge of public attitudes to these innovations. Both of these measures are important for the maintenance of public trust in the uses of genetic information for contemporary policing.

ends

For further information contact:
Robin Williams, Senior Lecturer in Sociology, School of Applied Social Sciences, University of Durham.
Tel: +44 (0)191 334 6842 (direct line/voicemail)
Fax: +44 (0)191 334 6821

Media enquiries to:
Tom Fennelly, Public Relations, University of Durham.
Tel +44 (0)191 334 6078
e-mail: t.p.fennelly@durham.ac.uk

Notes to editors:

1. The National DNA Database (NDNAD) of England & Wales was established on April 10th 1995 as the first of its kind. On July 31st 2004, it contained 2,396,429 profiles obtained from samples taken from individuals suspected of involvement in a recordable offence, and a further 227,010 profiles obtained from samples collected at scenes of crime.
2. It is the largest such 'national' database in the world (it contains the largest number of individual profiles and also holds the largest proportion of profiles per head of the population of any criminal jurisdiction).
3. Since April 2001, the Government has provided more than £200 million of dedicated funding for its expansion. The database is managed on behalf of the Association of Chief Police Officers by the Forensic Science Service, currently a UK Government agency.
4. The report will stimulate discussion and debate among and across a wide range of stakeholders including forensic scientists, crime scene personnel, police officers, policy makers and lawyers. It will also create interest among human rights groups and academics.

The full Report and the Executive Summary can be found on: www.dur.ac.uk/p.j.johnson/