EU: DNA: how long before we are all "profiled"?
01 January 2001
Developments in the EU, UK and Germany will extend the information available from genetic profiles, the number of people on DNA databases and the exchange of DNA analysis results
EU: Demands for race and gender identification in police DNA analysis
The Netherlands has proposed that the police forces in the European Union should extend the scope of DNA analysis to enable them to establish the “population group or race”, gender and - once the technology enables it - the eye and hair colour of people whose DNA profiles are held in national databases.
Background
The Dutch demands came in mid-January as part of negotiations on a draft EU measure on the standardised use of DNA technology and the exchange of analysis results which has been on the table for almost two years. The proposal builds on a 1997 EU Resolution that called upon the member states to establish national DNA databases and for a European database to be set up.
The current draft Resolution sets out seven DNA "markers" to ensure that member states use the same technology for DNA analysis in their criminal justice systems. It also allows member states to begin exchanging DNA profiles with one another (as a Resolution it is non-binding and will let those member states that are ready to begin exchanges do so ahead of others who have not yet even established databases). However, there are no data protection rules or "legal safeguards" governing the exchange of DNA profiles in the proposal, with the risk that there will be no effective guarantee for an individual to be able to gain access to their file or legally challenge its use following an exchange; no enforceable rules concerning the expiry, correction or deletion of files; no rules on jurisdiction over complaints or damages; and no principles governing independent data protection supervisory bodies (see Statewatch vol 10 no 5). The House of Commons Select Committee on European Scrutiny has expressed “surprise” at the absence of data protection rules, and requested that Home Office Minister Barbara Roche “reassure” them that people’s DNA data will be “adequately protected”.
Also cause for concern is the fact both the 1997 Resolution and the current proposal refer only to the use of DNA evidence in the "investigation of crime", with no reference to a limitation of circumstances in which people can have their DNA taken or retained, or to any scope of offences (as there is in the member states).
Work to establish a European DNA database is likely to follow the adoption of the Resolution and an initial exchange of profiles between member states. Discussions are also taking place within Interpol where an international DNA database comprising the European countries, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, USA and Japan etc. has been proposed.
The Netherlands demands
The Netherlands objection to the current draft is the proposal to “limit DNA analysis to chromosome segments containing no genetic information factor, i.e. not known to provide information about specific hereditary characteristics” (Article III (1)). The restriction had been proposed to allay concerns that rapid advances in DNA profiling technology would allow the determination of genetic “disorders” and hereditary diseases in the future. They have proposed that that the Article should instead “limit DNA analysis to the establishment and comparison of DNA profiles and the determination of external personal characteristics, i.e. not to the establishment of hereditary disorders or diseases” (emphasis added).
The Netherlands' position dispels the claim by the law enforcement community that DNA profiles are merely “fingerprints for the twenty-first century” - the crucial difference being that a fingerprint can only be used to place a person at a given location while DNA from cellular material has the potential to provide an entire genetic profile of an individual. As analysis of the human genome gathers pace, profiles will yield more and more i