UK National DNA Database
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The United Kingdom National DNA Database (NDNAD; officially the UK National Criminal Intelligence DNA Database) was set up in 1995. As of the end of 2005 it carries the profiles around 3.4 million people, over 585,000 of them taken from children aged under 16 .
Only short tandem repeats are stored in the NDNAD - not a person's full genetic code. However, individuals' DNA samples are also kept permanently linked to the database and contain unlimited genetic information. Because DNA is inherited, the database can also be used to indirectly identify many others in the population related to a database subject.
The NDNAD is run by the Forensic Science Service, an executive agency of the UK Home Office, for the Association of Chief Police Officers. Between April 1995 and March 2004, the database cost £182 million.[2]
Contents |
[edit] Database subjects
Initially only samples from convicted criminals, or people awaiting trial, were recorded. This is still the case for DNA from most people arrested in Scotland, although a new law will allow the DNA from people charged with a serious sexual or violent offence to be kept for up to 5 years after acquittal. In England and Wales, the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 allowed DNA to be retained from people charged with an offence, even if they were subsequently acquitted. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 later allowed DNA to be taken on arrest, rather than on charge. Since April 2004, when this law came into force, anyone arrested in England and Wales on suspicion of involvement in any recordable offence (all except the most minor offences) has their DNA sample taken and permanently stored in the database, whether or not they are subsequently charged or convicted. By September 2005 the Home Office estimated that these legal changes had resulted in an extra 162,000 samples being stored, linked to 116 rapes and 96 murders¹. However, not all these matches will have led to criminal convictions and some will be matches with innocent people who were at the crime scene. Critics argue that the decision to keep large numbers of innocent people on the database does not appear to have increased the likelihood of solving a crime using DNA.
[edit] Legal challenges
In November 2004 the Court of Appeal held that the keeping of persons charged, yet not convicted, was lawful. [3]. However, an appeal is being made to the European Court of Human Rights.
The issue of taking fingerprints and a DNA sample was also involved in a case decided at the High Court on March 23, 2006. A teacher who was accused of assault won the right to have her DNA sample and fingerprints destroyed. They had been taken whilst she was in custody, but after the Crown Prosecution Service had decided to not pursue any charges against her. She should have been released expediently once this was the case and so her continued detention to obtain samples was unlawful, and thus the samples were taken "without appropriate authority" [4]. Had they been taken before the decision not to prosecute, the samples would have been lawful and retained as normal.
[edit] Origin and function
The United Kingdom's The National DNA Database (NDNAD) was set up in 1995 using the SGM DNA profiling system (SGM+ DNA profiling system since 1998) and is currently run by the government owned Forensic Science Service (FSS). All data held on The National DNA database is governed by a tri-partite board consisting of the Home Office, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and the Association of Police Authorities (APA), there are also independent representatives present from the Human Genetics Commission. The data held on The NDNAD is owned by the Police authority which submitted the sample for analysis. The samples are stored permanently by the companies that analyse them, for an annual fee.
Although currently run by the FSS, the UK's largest forensic service provider, all forensic service providers in the UK which meet the accredited standards can interact with The NDNAD. The UK's NDNAD is the foremost and largest forensic DNA database of its kind in the world - containing more than 5% of the population, compared to 0.5% in the USA.
The data held on the National DNA Database consists of both demographic sample data and the numerical DNA profile. Records on The NDNAD are held for both individuals sampled under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) and for unsolved crime-stains (such as from blood, semen, saliva, hair and cellular materials left at a crime scene)
Each day the NDNAD's records are automatically searched for matches (hits) between individuals and unsolved crime-stain records and unsolved crime-stain to unsolved crime-stain records. linking both individuals to crimes and crimes to crimes. Any NDNAD hits obtained are reported directly to the Police force which submitted the sample for analysis. The NDNAD is widely acknowledged as an intelligence tool, for its ability to aid in the solving of crimes, both past and present. However, it's rapid growth in size in recent years has been controversial because there are only a few jurisdictions that allow the permanent retention of DNA from people who have not been convicted of any offence.
As well as its daily automated intelligence search, one-off speculative intelligence searches of The NDNAD can be initiated by scientists in instances where a crime-stain DNA profile does not meet the required standard for loading to The NDNAD. These searches can produce many matches which may be restricted by demographic data.
The latest innovative intelligence approach brought forward by the FSS, is in the use of familial searching. This is a process that may be carried out in relation to unsolved crime-stains whereby a suspects DNA may not be held on the NDNAD, but that of a close relative is. This method identifies potential relatives by identifying DNA profiles held on The NDNAD that are similar. Again many matches may be produced which may be restricted by demographic data. However, this technique raises new privacy concerns because it could lead to the police identifying cases of non-paternity.
[edit] Controversy and privacy concerns
The UK DNA database is the world's largest, and has prompted concerns from some quarters as to its scope and usage. Recordable offences include begging, being drunk and disorderly and taking part in an illegal demonstration. Many innocent people - including children from the age of ten - are arrested but never charged with minor offences, some of which may later be proved to have been committed by another person. Changes in the powers of arrest granted to the police by the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 have led to expectations of even more samples being added.
The Black Police Association has called for an enquiry into why the database holds details of 37% of black men but fewer than 10% of white men. [5] A further concern has been raised over the 24,000 samples held of children and young people aged from 10 to 18 who have never been convicted, cautioned or charged with any offence. [6] The use of the database for genetic research without consent has also been controversial, as has the storage of DNA samples and sensitive information by the commercial companies which analyse them for the police.[7]
Given the privacy issues, but set against the usefulness of the database in identifying offenders, some have argued for a system whereby the encrypted data associated with a sample is held by a third, trusted, party and is only revealed if a crime scene sample is found to contain that DNA. Such an approach has been advocated by the inventor of genetic fingerprinting, Alec Jeffreys. [8]
Others have argued that there should be time limits on how long DNA profiles can be retained on the Database, except for people convicted of serious violent or sexual offences. GeneWatch UK has launched a campaign calling on people to reclaim their DNA if they have not been charged or convicted of a serious offence, and has called for more safeguards to prevent misuse of the database. The Human Genetics Commission has argued that individuals' DNA samples should be destroyed after the DNA profiles used for identification purposes have been obtained.
A YouGov poll published on December 4, 2006, indicated that 48% of those interviewed disapproved of keeping DNA records of those who have not been charged with any crime who have been acquitted, with 37% in favour [9].
In early 2007, five civil servants were arrested on charges of industrial espionage for allegedly stealing DNA information from the database and using it to establish a rival firm [10]
