Netherlands: DNA samples become obligatory on conviction
01 August 2004
The Dutch Parliament has passed a Bill that makes it obligatory for anyone convicted of a crime that carries a sentence of four years or more, to provide a DNA sample. Previously, suspects would give a DNA sample when a serious crime, such as murder or rape, was involved. During preliminary analysis the sample can be compared with DNA that is found at the scene of the crime. It is also possible to compare samples with profiles stored on the DNA databank, which contains 14,500 profiles. People can also give a voluntary DNA sample to prove their innocence.
The DNA debate began in the Netherlands at the beginning of the 1990s, when there was fierce resistance to, and extensive discussion on, the subject, in contrast to the present-day situation. In 1990 the High Curt ruled against the obligatory delivery of DNA because there was no legal basis for such an infringement of the "physical integrity" of a suspect. This changed in 1994 when the courts ruled that samples could be taken when urgently needed for a criminal investigation carrying a sentence of more than six years. This legal remit proved to be very flexible when the newspaper
Trouw disclosed, in October 1998, the large scale collection of DNA specimens, from burglaries in the provinces of Utrecht and West Brabant. The High Court consolidated this practice in 1999, after a case involving DNA specimens taken by police during an Amsterdam house-search. In September 2003, the Dutch parliament passed a law permitting the identification of racial and gender information from samples found at the scene of a crime
By October 2002 the Dutch Forensic Institute at Rijswijk held 5,147 DNA specimens and 2,074 identified samples. A year later, in November 2003, the Institute held 10,864 specimens and 3,489 identified samples. Currently there are 14,500 samples with 5,737 identified profiles in the database.
The new Bill permits genetic material to be taken from anyone who is convicted of a crime with a penalty of four years or more. In reality this is likely to impact on all criminal acts that fall under the penal code. There are some exceptions, such as perjury or forgery - the reason being that these crimes do not have any relation to physical characteristics.
In future it will be necessary to provide a DNA sample where a person is charged with an offence where the sentence is four years or more but has been given a lesser sentence - for example, a suspended sentence or community service. The only exception will be sentences punishable by a fine. For those sentenced while in custody, DNA samples will be taken by prison personnel. A convicted person awaiting imprisonment or community service will be invited to the police station to provide a DNA sample; for those who fail to appear the public prosecutor will issue an arrest warrant. The period of detention for an arrested person will be extended by six hours (above the existing 6 or 12 hour current limit) to collect a DNA sample. In cases where an individual protests strongly it is permitted to take a blood or hair sample.
The new Bill will not work retrospectively for people who have already served their sentence. It does apply to people in prison when the Bill becomes law or if they are convicted but not yet jailed.
It is unclear when the Bill will become law, but it will be introduced in two stages. The first stage is for those convicted of acts of violence or a sexual offences, in the second phase those convicted of lesser crimes will be obliged to provide DNA samples.
Police chiefs would like to see the new measures go further with some of them pushing for a national database. Others argue for the retention of DNA samples from anyone who is held in police custody for a period of more than six hours. The Amsterdam police chief, Bernard Welten, who is also the Council of Police Chiefs representative responsible for forensic research, drew a comparison between CCTV and the DNA database: "Ten