UK DNA Database Found To Violate Human Rights
from the storing-non-convict-DNA dept
A European court has slapped down the UK for violating human rights with its fingerprint and DNA database, in that it retained the data on people not convicted of crimes. Until now, the UK police recorded fingerprints and DNA info on everyone arrested, but two guys who weren't convicted felt that their info should be deleted from the database, and the court has now agreed. The UK's defense was that "this info is important in fighting crime." Of course, so would be forcing everyone to wear a GPS device and record everything they do on cameras only the police can watch -- but we don't allow that because it's a violation of privacy. Either way, the UK now needs to start destroying info in its database and purge its data on other people who weren't convicted.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: dna, fingerprints, human rights, uk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Not quite...
Which mean, until we figure out how to get around it. Even if the ruling is implemented completely, the police are still allowed to keep records of innocent people for a period of time.
More background here; Europe DNA ruling resonates in UK
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
STorage of DNA records
The 'suits' will obay the law, and still retain their coveted information.
""1984"" is coming, late, but its coming!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: STorage of DNA records
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: STorage of DNA records
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This one clearly violates the US Constitution, 4th amendment...
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
Keeping the fingerprints and DNA fails the "probable cause" clause.
As the article points out, without the 4th amendment, the government could gather as much information about citizens as it wanted all in the name of "fighting crime". Why not fingerprint and DNA bank everyone, force all monetary transactions thru government servers, require all public opinion to be first vetted by government censors; oh wait that is Mainland China.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This one clearly violates the US Constitution, 4th amendment...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This one clearly violates the US Constitution, 4th amendment...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This one clearly violates the US Constitution, 4th amendment...
1. this was about the UK, so the US Constitution doesn't really apply;
2. the requirement for probable cause applies to gathering the information in the first place, and arguably does not apply to merely keeping the record of it afterward;
3. how is keeping DNA records any different than keeping your mugshot on file? I'm sure the two guys in the story were photographed by police. Should the police be required to destroy the photos as well as the DNA samples?
4. there's arguably nothing wrong with the government collecting information on you. It's when you're forced to provide it against your will that's an issue. If you spit on the sidewalk, what's to stop a cop from nabbing the sample for DNA purposes? That's different from forcing you to provide a DNA sample.
I'm not sure what's worse: knee-jerk right-wingers who really do adopt a "the means justifies the ends" policy that says it's OK to violate the rights of citizens if it catches crooks, or knee-jerk left-wingers who don't actually know what the Constitution means and oh-so-knowingly point to "rights" that don't exist.
HM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But if you didn't actually commit the crime and they are retaining the information - well, obviously - these people didn't like that, case in point: it was against their will.
Since they hadn't actually broken any law, I'm not sure why there's an issue with them removing the records. Of course, the way the laws are now, they can pretty much bust you for just about anything at anytime.
But further:
Of course, so would be forcing everyone to wear a GPS device and record everything they do on cameras only the police can watch -- but we don't allow that because it's a violation of privacy
Do you seriously think the Government will be able to keep their data safe? There's been MORE than one example of data getting leaked. If you have a camera on your that's RF capable, or a chip that's RF capable - don't think for one single second that someone *else* can't get to that data. Look, it's only a computer - a machine, it will do whatever a person (any person at all) that has the ability to tell it what to do; legally or not.
Say I'm rich - and want to stalk a person - I could grease a palm or two. Say your EX works for the police department, or the IT department where this data is housed? What if a pedophile works for the department or a contractor who maintains the equipment?
They act like 'chips' are the 'save all' for everything. How it will keep 'the kids safe' - but God forbid if a pedophile gets the tracking information for your kid - it will make it just as easy for them to find the kid.
Assuming they have a reader, and can locate the thing under the skin, or have improvised and made a Faraday cage in a van - the chip won't help you find the kid, but it sure the hell helped them.
Basically - if you want to look at it this way - *Our DNA is our OWN Intellectual Property* isn't it? If artist have rights to their IP, we should have rights to our personal IP as well, wouldn't you agree?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Then at the end in a happy fun voice who wants their finger prints taken. Of course everyone lines up to get them taken since it's fun.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Would you rather keep your 'privacy' to yourself or be safe in the knowledge that some thug would be deterred from assaulting your daughter?
Another article on this has already shown that the DNA on these innocents has already helped apprehend those that go onto commit a crime. And comparing it to a GPS tracker is wrong, that would be an clearly be an obtrusive deterrent, where as a DNA database is a quick sample and that's it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To all the potential criminals
Give them your credit report, your bank accounts, your medical records and give the police complete access to your information on line, passwords, account numbers, everything. Don’t be a hypocrite, you have nothing to hide OR do you?
If you don’t do this, I have to assume you have something to hide and should be treated as a “potential” criminal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: To all the potential criminals
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I can see it now
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Consitution
But the USA Gov likes to extend the Constitution to other
countries. Mmmm.. oil... They need to be free, like us! BOMB BOMB BOMB!!!
except is the cases of.. Hmmm.. can't unfairly detain ppl.. lets build a prison in another country! and claim you have no rights because you're in another country now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AC
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: AC
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DNA database is just another set of records to help solve crimes.
It is not the same as cameras or GPS that track things in real time, it is merely a static database.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DNA and IP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: DNA and IP
As for "well, you're in police files, so what?", that's an extremely naive statement. You're assuming that all the data on you in the database is accurate and will never lead to a case of mistaken arrest (good luck getting your DNA overturned as evidence if that happens). You're assuming that the data will never be sold off to 3rd parties and misused (sorry, sir, you have a genetic 4% chance of developing testicular cancer so just pay up the extra $500 for health insurance). You assume that all the data will be used correctly with no cock-ups, no corruption and no risk. There isn't a single current police procedure that matches that description.
Maybe these things aren't likely, but they're a lot more likely if they have your DNA on file than if not. No innocent person should ever be forced to give these things up, and even guilty parties should only have it done in order to solve/prevent future crimes and for no other purpose.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: DNA and IP
And anyway it's not a full DNA record, it's about 12 important markers. 2 out of every million share a matching set of those records. It goes up in odds if they're related. These markers seem to have little effect on apperence and the like.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Like other records
If DNA samples are not significantly different that fingerprints, does this mean all police forces have to delete their fingerprint databases?
The main benefit of these databases is to compare suspects to people who have been previously arrested. If the police only have a DNA sample at the crime scene, how else are they going to match it?
Ah, so that's why these guys want their DNA removed: so they can keep committing crimes and the police won't have their DNA on file.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In this case it was the ECHR.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DNA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DNA removal innocent people
Also the UK security agencys will happily 'swap' such data bases with those of other countries, that contain only convicted criminals and 'known' terrorists.
Now all of the sudden you are classified as one of thoses by association in those countries!
More on IdentitySpace (just Google it)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DNA retention by police
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DNA when forced to have a caution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]