Government outlines new proposals for DNA database

Removing innocent people from the national DNA database (NDNAD) is among the proposals set out by the Home Secretary last week in a public consultation on how the NDNAD should be regulated.
Keeping the right people on the DNA database proposes that people arrested for a crime but not convicted should have their files automatically deleted from the NDNAD after six years and after 12 years if they were arrested for a serious violent or sexual crime.
All DNA samples would also be destroyed as soon as they are converted into a profile on the NDNAD; though there are concerns that such profiles are less reliable than actual samples.
The proposals have been designed to remove the current ‘blanket’ retention policy and replace it with a retention framework which will “discriminate between different kinds of case and for the application of strictly defined storage periods for data”.
Other proposals include:
•Retain indefinitely all DNA profiles and fingerprints of those convicted of a recordable offence.
•Remove profiles of young people arrested but not convicted or convicted for less serious offences as a teenager when they turn 18.
•Change the law to retrospectively add all serious violent and sexual criminals who were convicted before the DNA database was established, including those who are now back in the community.
•Keep fingerprints for those arrested but not convicted of serious violent or sexual crimes for 12 years, and six years for all other crimes, before automatic deletion.
•Those under 18 who are convicted on only one occasion of a lesser offence will have their profile removed from the database when they turn 18. Those under 18 who are arrested but not convicted of a serious violent or sexual or terrorism-related offence will have the profile retained for 12 years, in the same way as for adults. Those under 18 who are arrested but not convicted of a lesser offence on one occasion will have the profile deleted after six years or on their 18th birthday, whichever is the sooner.
The consultation also suggests that police should be allowed to take DNA from people convicted of serious violent and sexual crimes abroad when they return to the UK.
Also set out in the consultation are the possible grounds for earlier destruction of profiles, which could be requested by application to a chief constable. Grounds might include cases of wrongful/unlawful arrest, mistaken identity, or in cases where it emerges no crime has been committed.
Human rights groups have been critical of the database for not distinguishing between the innocent and the guilty or for the severity of the crimes committed. But supporters have pointed to its use in helping to solve cold cases. Between April 1998 and September 2008 there were more than 390,000 crimes with DNA matches, providing the police with a lead on the possible identity of the offender.
Launching the public consultation, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said: “These new proposals will ensure that the right people are on the database, as well as considering where people should come off.
“We will ensure that the most serious offenders are added to the database no matter when or where they were convicted. We also know that the database has provided matches for a significant number of serious crimes as well as providing thousands of matches for less serious crimes that cause great concern to victims, such as burglary, which is why we are proposing to keep some profiles for six years.”
Chris Sims, Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) lead on forensic science and chief constable of Staffordshire Police, said: “In recent years the nature of investigative policing has transformed through the advances made by forensic science. In many harrowing and high profile cases, the use of DNA and forensic techniques enabled investigators to bring the guilty to justice many years after the event.
“The police service recognises that the use of personal information by the state poses ethical questions, even when that use is in the pursuit