• Home
• About GeneWatch
• GM Crops and Food
• GM animals
• New Genetic Engineering Techniques
• Human Genetics
  • Genes and Health
  • Genes and Marketing
  • Privacy and Discrimination
    • Data Protection and Digital Information Bill
    • The UK Police National DNA Database
      • A brief legal history of the NDNAD
      • Facts and Figures
      • Whose DNA profiles are on the database?
      • What happens when someone is arrested.
      • Governance
      • Reclaim your DNA
      • The DNA database in Scotland
      • Genetic research and DNA sample storage
      • Nuffield DNA consultation
      • Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) consultations
      • DNA Database: what can I do?
      • DNA database: Parliament and consultations
      • The Marper case
      • Home Office DNA consultation
      • Crime and Security Act 2010
      • Protection of Freedoms Bill
      • The DNA database in Northern Ireland
      • Police National Computer
      • Pruem Decisions
      • Supreme Court Judgment
      • Protection of Freedoms Act
    • International DNA databases
  • Genetic Research
  • Reproductive Genetics
  • Genes and the NHS
  • Genes and behaviour
• Laboratory and Industrial Use
• Research Agendas and Patenting
• Trade issues
• Biological Weapons
• Publications
• Press Releases
• Donate

You are in Human Genetics → Privacy and Discrimination → The UK Police National DNA Database → Supreme Court Judgment

Supreme Court Judgment

In May 2011, the Supreme Court made a declaration that that the Association of Chief Police Officer (ACPO) guidelines on the retention of DNA, fingerprints and Police National Computer (PNC) records (adopted in 2006) are unlawful because they are incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Supreme Court's judgment means that:

• The judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Marper case now applies to the UK courts
• The current police guidelines for the retention of DNA, fingerprints and Police National Computer (PNC) records in England and Wales are unlawful
• The Government has a "reasonable time" to adopt new rules on retention (currently being considered by parliament in the Protection of Freedoms Bill). If it fails to do so up to a million innocent people could bring cases to court.

Resources

• External links
  • Exceptional Case Requests - Consideration for the Removal of DNA, Fingerprints and PNC Records (8th June 2011)

    Police guidelines issued in response to the Supreme Court confirm that the police will continue operating its existing (unlawful) 'exceptional cases' procedure for the removal of records on the Police National Computer (PNC), DNA database and fingerprint databases until parliament has finished consideration of the Protection of Freedoms Bill.

• Official documents
  • Supreme Court judgment (summary)

  • Supreme Court judgment

• Press articles
  • Public Service: Police DNA retention policy 'unlawful' (18th May 2011)

  • UK Human Rights blog: Retention of DNA breaches human right to privacy, says Supreme Court (18th May 2011)

  • The Guardian: DNA retention judgment won't see discriminatory policy destroyed (18th May 2011)

  • The Register: Supreme Court: DNA database retention regs are unlawful (18th May 2011)

  • The Guardian: Police breaking law by keeping DNA of the innocent, supreme court rules (18th May 2011)

  • BBC Online: DNA and fingerprint guidelines 'unlawful' (18th May 2011)

  • The Independent: Guidelines on DNA samples unlawful (18th May 2011)

↑ Top

Resources

• External links
• Official documents
• Press articles