Press release – for immediate release
Tuesday, 19 January 2010
Ireland’s leading rights watchdog, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) has said that it will review the Government’s new DNA Database Bill to establish if it now strikes the right balance between catching criminals and protecting private life.
Speaking shortly after the release of the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence and DNA Database System) Bill 2010, ICCL Director Mr Mark Kelly said:
“In December 2008, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties requested the Attorney General to review the Government’s proposed DNA database legislation in the light of an important decision by the European Court of Human Rights (S. and Marper v the United Kingdom). Speaking in the Dáil last December, the Minister for Justice, Dermot Ahern TD indicated that this had been done, and accepted that there are significant issues in privacy and human rights in regard to the DNA database.” (See notes to editors below for full details).
“There is an entirely legitimate public interest in the creation of a DNA database that makes it easier to catch criminals; however, the sampling, retention and sharing of DNA requires special safeguards to ensure that the private lives of innocent people are protected”. Mr Kelly added.
“The ICCL will review this 143-page Bill in order to establish whether it now strikes the right balance between catching criminals and protecting private life”, he concluded.
For more information, please contact:
Walter Jayawardene
Campaigns and Communications Officer
Irish Council for Civil Liberties
9-13 Blackhall Place
Dublin 7
Ireland
Tel. + 353 1 799 4504
Mob: +353 87 9981574
E-mail: walter.jayawardene@iccl.ie
Notes to editors
1. The General Scheme of a Criminal Justice (Forensic Sampling and Evidence) Bill was first published in 2007. Amongst other measures, it suggested that samples from suspects might be retained indefinitely on a DNA database. The Irish Council for Civil Liberties and other expert bodies, including the Irish Human Rights Commission, expressed concerns about the human rights implications of the Scheme of the Bill.
2. On 4 December 2008, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights issued its judgment in the case of S. and Marper v the United Kingdom. The judgment is available in full from the Court’s website at: http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view.asp?item=1&portal=hbkm&action=html&highlight=marper&sessionid=43237644&skin=hudoc-en
The Strasbourg Court found that the blanket and indiscriminate retention of fingerprints, cellular samples and DNA profiles of persons suspected but not convicted of offences failed to strike a fair balance between the public interest in the detection of crime and the right to respect for private life. Blanket and indiscriminate retention was found to constitute a disproportionate interference with the applicants’ right to respect for private life and could not be regarded as necessary in a democratic society. The Court concluded unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (right to privacy) in this case.
3. That same day (4 December 2008), the Irish Council for Civil Liberties wrote to the Attorney General (copied to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform) in the following terms:
“Dear Attorney General,
I am writing to enclose a copy of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of S. and Marper v the United Kingdom (application nos. 30562/04 and 30566/04, judgment of 4 December 2008).
This judgment is especially notable because it includes a comparative analysis of the existing law relating to the retention of DNA samples in a number of other Council of Europe member States, including Ireland.
The Court implicitly welcomes that fact that, under current Irish law (the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence) Act 1990), the taking of DNA information in the context of criminal proceedings is not systematic, and that such information must be destroyed upon acquittal or the discontinuance of criminal proceedings (paragraphs 46 and 47 of the judgment). However, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) understands that a change in Irish law on this point may be imminent.
Having regard to the Court’s judgment that the “blanket and indiscriminate” retention of fingerprints, cellular samples and DNA profiles of people suspected but not convicted of a criminal offence violates the European Convention on Human Rights, the ICCL respectfully requests that the necessary steps be taken to ensure that any reform of Irish law in this area fully respects the State’s obligations under Article 8 of the Convention.
Yours sincerely,
Mark Kelly, Director”
4. One year later, on International Human Rights Day (10 December 2009), the Minister for Justice, Dermot Ahern TD told the Dáil that the DNA Database Bill would be published “very shortly”, adding that:
“The reason there has been a delay in this, particularly during my time, which is what I am directly responsible for, is due to the Marper v. United Kingdom case, in which judgment was given by the European Court of Human Rights in December 2008. This raised significant issues in regard to the right of privacy, including unjustified interference with the right to privacy, which we have taken into account and which required the Bill to be reconsidered. There are significant issues in privacy and human rights in regard to the DNA database.”