FDNAPI Wiki - User contributions [en]

China

2014-04-23T18:36:17Z

86.132.109.236:

China set up a DNA database in 2004. DNA samples are collected by regional police forces and it is unclear to what extent DNA profiles are shared nationally. A DNA database has been set up to track missing and abducted children.

Within China, [http://wiki.dnapolicyinitiative.org/index.php?title=China_%28Hong_Kong%29 Hong Kong] has had a separate database since 2001, using the US CODIS profiling system.

The 2008 Interpol survey reports that 126,000 crime scene DNA profiles and 1,065,000 individuals' profiles, plus 9600 unknown/deceased DNA profiles were held in China at the time of the survey. Hong Kong had 4,161 crime scene DNA profiles and 16,235 individuals' profiles.

== Resources ==
* External links
**[http://www.promega.co.uk/~/media/files/resources/conference%20proceedings/ishi%2023/poster%20abstracts/114%20poster.pdf?la=en Bin Li et al (2012): CONCORDANCE STUDY ON MAJOR STR MULTIPLEX KITS AND THE EFFECT OF USING MULTIPLE KITS ON THE CHINA NATIONAL DNA DATABASE]
**[http://www.promega.com/~/media/files/resources/conference%20proceedings/ishi%2011/poster%20abstracts/jiang.pdf?la=en Xianhua Jiang et al. (2000) STUDY OF ESTABLISHMENT MODE OF DNA DATABASE IN CHINA]
**[http://www.promega.co.uk/~/media/files/resources/profiles%20in%20dna/203/dna%20analysis%20in%20china.pdf?la=en Hu Lan: DNA Analysis in China (1999)]
* Press articles
**[http://www.womenofchina.cn/html/womenofchina/report/172371-1.htm All-China Women's Federation: Helping Missing Children Come Home (22nd April 2014)]
**[http://www.womenofchina.cn/html/womenofchina/report/169750-1.htm All-China Women's Federation: Not Necessary to Collect All Newborns' DNA, Says Official (14th February 2014)]
**[http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/817443.shtml#.UlqjFhA7I5A Global Times: Police request blood samples from college students for DNA database (13th October 2013)]
**[http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2013/1/27/asia/20130127083717&sec=asia China Daily: DNA database gives hope for abducted children (28th January 2013)]
**[http://www.china.org.cn/china/2013-01/22/content_27756427.htm China.org.cn: Database gives hope to abducted children (22nd January 2013)]
**[http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/1244373/1/.html Channel News Asia: China busts trafficking ring, 89 children rescued (24th December 2012)]
** [http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2012-03/01/content_14726616.htm Shanghai debuts system to assist child beggars (5th March 2012)]
** [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/07/china-trafficking-crackdown-rescue-children The Guardian: China trafficking crackdown leads to rescue of 178 children (7th December 2011)]
** [http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2011-09/25/content_13788644.htm China Daily: Police bring 1,400 vagrant or abducted kids home (25th September 2011)]
** [http://english.cri.cn/6909/2011/09/25/1781s659880.htm CRIEnglish.com: DNA Matching Returns 1,400 Vagrant Minors Home (25th September 2011)]
** [http://www.china.org.cn/china/2011-02/12/content_21904672.htm China.org.cn: Police increase efforts to rescue child beggars (12th February 2011)]
** [http://news.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/Asia/Story/A1Story20110212-263151.html AsiaOne: Chinese police increase efforts to rescue child beggars (12th February 2011)]
** [http://www.shanghaidaily.com/sp/article/2010/201001/20100113/article_425600.htm Shanghai Daily: Abducted children rescued in Guanxi (13th January 2010)]
** [http://english.cctv.com/20100109/102304.shtml CCTV: Chinese police free 10,820 trafficked women, children in nearly nine months (8th Jaunuary 2010)]
** [http://articles.latimes.com/2009/dec/28/world/la-fg-china-search28-2009dec28 LA Times: Adoptive families' quests to trace Chinese roots often meet dead ends (28th December 2009)]
** [http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/world/china/China-begins-DNA-tests-of-nightclub-workers/articleshow/4896997.cms Times of India: China begins DNA tests of nightclub workers (15th August 2009)]
** [http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2009-08/15/content_8573991.htm China Daily: Collection of DNA arouses hot debate (15th August 2009)]
** [http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hfQXSJm4M5JzsVdaLlcYJ-62wVmQ AFP: China city seeks DNA records for bar workers (14th August 2009)]
** [http://english.cri.cn/6909/2009/08/13/189s508756.htm CRIEnglish.com: Police take entertainment workers' DNA (13th August 2009)]

France

2014-04-23T18:27:51Z

86.132.109.236:

__TOC__

== Overview ==
The Fichier National Automatisé des Empreintes Génétiques (Automated National File of Genetic Prints) is the French national DNA database. A central DNA database was first proposed in France in 1996. The following year, a bill was filed relating to the implementation of a national database for identification of child sex offenders. In June 1998, a law on the prevention of sexually-related crimes created a national DNA database. The implementation, originally planned for 1999, was finally completed in 2001. In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks on the USA in 2001, the French government increased the scope of the database to include DNA related to other serious criminal offences, such as voluntary manslaughter, criminal violence and terrorism. A further “law for interior safety” introduced on March 18, 2003 expanded the scope still further to cover almost all violent crimes to people or property, serious crimes such as drug trafficking, simple thefts, and almost all small offenses, except traffic offenses. Samples are collected both from suspects and convicted persons.

As at October 1, 2003, the French national DNA database contained the DNA profiles of approximately 8,000 convicted criminals and another 3,200 suspects. In 2006, the number of entries grew to 330,000. In May 2007, this number approached 500,000 entries. In December 2009, there were 1.27 million entries. The DNA database contained DNA profiles from 280,399 convicted persons, 62,258 unmatched crime scene profiles and 934,112 suspects at end 2009.

== Resources ==

*External links
**[https://www.europol.europa.eu/content/memberpage/france-761 Europol: France]
**[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FNAEG Wikipedia: FNAEG (French national DNA database)]
**[http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCode.do;jsessionid=53EFA8AA6022577EA7EEC1D9A4D85D28.tpdjo08v_2?idSectionTA=LEGISCTA000006138132&cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006071154&dateTexte=20110119 France: Code of Criminal Procedure (modified 2010)]
**[http://questions.assemblee-nationale.fr/q13/13-68468QE.htm Assemblee Nationale: Question on DNA database numbers (6th April 2010)]

*Press articles
**[http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2014/0415/Mass-DNA-sweep-in-privacy-loving-France-Why-no-backlash-video Christian Science Monitor: Mass DNA sweep in privacy-loving France: Why no backlash? (15th April 2014)]
**[http://www.laboratoryequipment.com/news/2014/04/france-casts-dna-dragnet-rape-case Laboratory Equipment: France Casts DNA Dragnet in Rape Case (15th April 2014)]
**[http://www.ldh-toulon.net/spip.php?article4788 LDH Toulon: la condamnation de Xavier Mathieu confirme les derives du fichage a l'ADN (4th February 2012)]
**[http://legalift.wordpress.com/2010/10/05/french-national-dna-database-found-constitutional-with-reservations/ The Lift: French national DNA database found constitutional with reservations (5th October 2010)]
**[http://www.lexpress.mu/article/immigration-en-france-le-ministre-besson-pour-labandon-des-tests-adn Lexpress: Immigration en France : Le ministre Besson pour l'abandon des tests ADN (14th September 2009)]
**[http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2007/05/05/a-8-et-11-ans-ils-sont-menaces-de-fichage-genetique-pour-vol-de-jouets_906026_3224.html Le Monde: A 8 et 11 ans, ils sont menaces de fichage genetique pour vol de jouets (5th May 2007)]

== Detailed Analysis ==
'''I. Law on Point'''

Code of Criminal Procedure<ref name="ftn1"><nowiki> Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter “C. Pr. Pén.”), Book III, Title XX [Du fichier national automatisé des empreintes génétiques] [The National Computerized Genetic Information Database] (Fr.).</nowiki>

</ref>

Law No. 98-468 of June 17, 1998<ref name="ftn2"><nowiki> Law No. 98-468 of June 17, 1998, Journal Officiel de la République Française [J.O.] [Official Gazette of France] June 18, 1998, p. 9255 (Fr.).</nowiki>

</ref>

Law No. 2001-1062 of November 15, 2001<ref name="ftn3"><nowiki> Law No. 2001-1062 of November 15, 2001, Journal Officiel de la République Française [J.O.] [Official Gazette of France] November 16, 2001, p. 18215 (Fr.).</nowiki>

</ref>

Law No. 2003-239 of March 18, 2003<ref name="ftn4"><nowiki> Law No. 2003-239 of March 18, 2003, Journal Officiel de la République Française [J.O.] [Official Gazette of France], March 19, 2003, p. 4761 (Fr.).</nowiki>

</ref>

Decree No. 2000-413 of May 18, 2000<ref name="ftn5"><nowiki> Decree No. 2000-413 of May 18, 2000, Journal Officiel de la République Française [J.O.] [Official Gazette of France], May 19, 2000, Text No. 16 (Fr.).</nowiki>

</ref>

Decree No. 2002-697 of April 30, 2002<ref name="ftn6"><nowiki> Decree No. 2002-697 of April 30, 2002, Journal Officiel de la République Française [J.O.] [Official Gazette of France], May 3, 2002, Text No. 69 (Fr.).</nowiki>

</ref>

Decree No. 2004-470 of May 25, 2004<ref name="ftn7"><nowiki> Decree No. 2004-470 of May 25, 2004, Journal Officiel de la République Française [J.O.] [Official Gazette of France], June 2, 2004, Text No. 21 (Fr.).</nowiki>

</ref>

Decree No. 2004-71 of May 25, 2004<ref name="ftn8"><nowiki> Decree No. 2004-471 of May 25, 2004, Journal Officiel de la République Française [J.O.] [Official Gazette of France], June 2, 2004, Text No. 22 (Fr.).</nowiki>

</ref>

Decree No. 2009-785 of June 23, 2009.<ref name="ftn9"><nowiki> Decree No. 2009-785 of June 23, 2009, Journal Officiel de la République Française [J.O.] [Official Gazette of France], June 25, 2009, Text No. 16 (Fr.).</nowiki>

</ref>

Deliberation No. 2008-113 of May 14, 2008<ref name="ftn10"><nowiki> Deliberation No. 2008-113 of May 14, 2008, Journal Officiel de la République Française [J.O.] [Official Gazette of France], June 25, 2009, Text No. 98 (Fr.).</nowiki>

</ref>

Circular of the Ministry of Justice of 27 July 2004<ref name="ftn11"> E.U. 9445/1/06 at 6.

</ref>

'''II. Entry Criteria'''

Persons convicted of or charged with a serious offence (list in law) and crime scene stains when deemed relevant<ref name="ftn12"> See EU Current Practices at 49.

</ref>

<nowiki>French law provides that genetic profiles of persons convicted of one certain enumerated offences are to be entered onto the Fichier National Automatisé des Empreintes Génétiques [Automated National Database of Genetic Fingerprints] (hereinafter “FNAEG”).</nowiki> <ref name="ftn13"> C. Pr. Pén., Book III, Title XX, Art. 706-55.

</ref> The crimes specificed are: (1) offences of a sexual nature;<ref name="ftn14"> See C. Pr. Pén., Art. 706-47; Penal Code (hereinafter “C. Pén.”) Art. 222-32.

</ref> (2) crimes against humanity, felonies involving intentional attacks on human life, torture and acts of barbarity, intentional violent acts, threatening personal violence, drug trafficking, offences against human liberty, human trafficking, procuring, the exploitation of begging, and the endangerment of minors;<ref name="ftn15"> See C. Pén., Arts. 221-1 to 221-5, 222-1 to 222-18, 222-34 to 222-40, 224-1 to 224-8, 225-4-1 to 225-4-4, 225-5 to 225-10, 225-12-1 to 225-12-3, 225-12-5 to 225-12-7 and 227-18 to 227-21.

</ref> (3) felonies and misdemeanors which constitute theft, extortion, fraud, destruction, damage and threats to attack property;<ref name="ftn16"> See C. Pén., Arts. 311-1 to 311-13, 312-1 to 312-9, 313-2 and 322-1 to 322-14.

</ref> (4) violations of the fundamental interests of the nation, terrorist acts, forging currency, and criminal associations;<ref name="ftn17"> See C. Pén., Arts. 410-1 to 413-12, 421-1 to 421-4, 442-1 to 442-5 and 450-1.

</ref> (5) certain other misdemeanors;<ref name="ftn18"> See Defense Code, Arts. L 2353-4 and L 2339-1 to L 2339-11.

</ref> and (6) offences relating to handling or laundering of the proceeds of crimes included in numbers (1) to (5).<ref name="ftn19"> See C. Pén., Arts. 321-1 to 321-7 and 324-1 to 324-6.

</ref>

The DNA profiles of persons against whom there is serious or corroborating evidence rendering it likely that they have committed any of the offences mentioned above are also stored in this database by order of the judicial police officer either automatically or at the request of the district prosecutor or of the investigating judge. <ref name="ftn20"> C. Pr. Pén., Art. 706-54.

</ref> French law also permits genetic profiles derived from unidentified crime scene stains collected during the investigation into causes of death or missing persons to be store in FNAEG . <ref name="ftn21"> C. Pr. Pén., Art. 706-54.

</ref>

'''III. Sample Collection'''

French law permits any district prosecutor, upon written order, to compel a genetic sample from any person sentenced to imprisonment for not less than ten years for analysis and inclusion in FNAEG. <ref name="ftn22"> C. Pr. Pén., Art. 706-56, § 1.

</ref> In all other cases, refusal to consent to DNA sampling is publishable by up to one year in prison and a fine of €15,000.<ref name="ftn23"> C. Pr. Pén., Art. 706-56, § 2.

</ref> When the underlying offense has been allegedly committed by a person already convicted of a felony, refusal to submit to the taking of a DNA sample is publishable to up to two years in prison and a fine of €30,000.<ref name="ftn24"> 127147682, Art. 706-56, § 2.

</ref> Thus, while the law is tetchily silent on the question of consent,<ref name="ftn25"> The one exception being that mentioned previously admitting of the coercive taking of a sample from anyone sentenced to more than ten years imprisonment.

</ref> refusal to consent is optional in only the most illusory of senses.

'''IV. Removal Criteria '''

Convicted persons’ profiles are kept for forty years after conviction upon their eightieth birthday, suspects’ profiles are removed by motion of the prosecutor or the individual upon grounds that their storage no longer serves its original purpose, and crime scene stains are deleted forty years after they have been analyzed<ref name="ftn26"> See EU Current Practices at 49-50.

</ref> French law directs that the genetic profiles of persons suspected of the above-enumerated crimes can be erased on any district prosecutor’s instructions, either on their own initiative or at the request of the suspect, where keeping them is no longer necessary in light of the reason for which they were created. <ref name="ftn27"> C. Pr. Pén., Art. 706-54.

</ref> For example, a suspects’ profile must be removed when insufficient evidence is produced linking him or her to the suspected crime or in the case that they are ultimately acquitted of all charges. Convicted offenders’ profiles are removed from the database forty years after their conviction or when they reach the age of eighty years. DNA profiles which are derived from unidentified biological material are removed forty years after analysis.<ref name="ftn28"> See EU Current Practices at 50.

</ref>

'''V. Sample Retention'''

Convicted persons’ samples are retained for forty years after their conviction or until their eightieth birthday; suspects’ samples are kept until conviction or acquittal: i.e. procedurally, DNA samples are treated as regular evidence<ref name="ftn29"> See EU Current Practices at 50.

</ref>

'''VI. Database Access'''

Decisions regarding database access are made by the Direction Centrale de la Police Judiciaire—Sous Direction de la Police Technique et Scientifique <nowiki>[Central Directorate of the Judicial Police—Sub-directorate of the Technical and Scientific Police].</nowiki><ref name="ftn30"> “Il existe également un comité de contrôle composé d’un magistrat du parquet hors hiérarchie assisté de trois spécialistes (un magistrat, un informaticien et un généticien) qui s’assure du bon fonctionnement du fichier conformément à la législation en vigueur.” E.U. 9445/1/06 at <nowiki>[***n.***]</nowiki>

</ref> Judicial police officers have only access to the identity, place of birth and the date of birth. Judicial police officers and magistrates are also informed on the matches that might be found in the database. DNA profiles can be exchanged with the other EU Member States through Interpol or rogatory letters on the condition of legal compatibility. As France has signed the Convention of Prüm, it will have automatic access to the database of its contracting partners in the near future. FNAET is an Oracle database with WEB architecture.

== References ==
<references/>

United States

2014-04-23T18:14:11Z

86.132.109.236:

The US federal DNA database (CODIS) was established in 1998. It is the largest in the world.

The 2008 Interpol survey reported that 245,171 crime scene DNA profiles and 6,454,770 individuals' profiles, plus 519 missing persons' DNA profiles and 2,283 unknown/deceased DNA profiles were held in the US at the time of the survey. Since then the size of the database has doubled. According to [http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/biometric-analysis/codis/ndis-statistics FBI statistics], the National DNA Index (NDIS) contained over 10,692,400 offender profiles, 1,711,100 arrestee profiles and 527,400 forensic profiles as of November 2013.

The federal database includes DNA profiles submitted under laws which vary state by state. The Justice for All Act, 2004, expanded the national database by allowing the retention of DNA profiles from anyone charged with a felony offence. The Violence Against Women Act, 2005, allows DNA profiles to be uploaded on arrest, rather than on charge.

By end 2013, 28 US states had changed their laws to allow collection of DNA prior to conviction for a range of offences (Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Vermont, Wisconsin). Of these 28 states, 10 require collection and/or analysis to occur only after changing, arraignment, indictment, or judicial determination of probable cause.

In March 2013, the Supreme Court made a 5-4 decision upholding Maryland's DNA testing law (which collects DNA on charge for some felonies and requires automatic expungement of innocent people's DNA profiles). However, laws in other states (which are broader in some cases, such as California, which collects on arrest for all felonies and has no automatic expungement process) are still subject to ongoing legal challenges. In most states, DNA profiles taken from arrested persons are not automatically removed if the person is innocent, although the individual can request removal. Automatic expungement processes exist in 7 of the 28 states which collect DNA prior to conviction.

== Resources ==
* External links
**[http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/03/20/10-15152.pdf United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Haskell v. Harris (20th March 2014)] Allows California's arrestee DNA testing law to continue but also grants leave to seek to narrow its application.
**[http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/codis-ext.htm US Department of Justice Office of Inspector General: Combined DNA Index System External Reports]
**[http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2014/January/14-at-029.html Press Release: U.S. Departments of Justice and Commerce Name Experts to First-ever National Commission on Forensic Science (10th January 2014)]
**[https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/243347.pdf National Institute of Justice: Making Sense of DNA Backlogs, 2012 - Myths vs. Reality (December 2013)]
**[http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/412831-Collecting-DNA-at-Arrest-Policies-Practices-and-Implications-Report.pdf The Urban Institute: Collecting DNA at Arrest: Policies, Practices, and Implications (3rd June 2013)]
**[http://forensicdnaconsulting.wordpress.com/ Forensic DNA Consulting Blog]
**[http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/biometric-analysis/codis FBI: Combined DNA Index System (CODIS)]
**[http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/biometric-analysis/codis/codis_expungement FBI: CODIS - Expungement Policy]
**[http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/biometric-analysis/federal-dna-database/legislation-affecting-the-federal-dna-database-unit FBI: Legislation Affecting the Federal DNA Database Unit]
**[http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/656454.pdf GAO: DOJ Could Improve Decision - Making Documentation and Better Assess Results of DNA Backlog Reduction Program Funds (July 2013)]
**[http://www.aclu.org/blog/womens-rights-prisoners-rights-technology-and-liberty/supreme-court-ruling-blow-genetic-privacy ACLU: Supreme Court Ruling a Blow to Genetic Privacy (3rd June 2013)]
**[http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-207_d18e.pdf US Supreme Court: Maryland v. King (3rd June 2013)]
**[http://erepository.law.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1160&context=student_scholarship Mandara (2013) Compulsory collection and retention of DNA upon arrest: Fourth Amendment Implications (1st May 2013)]
**[http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/pageDocuments/WG7KWC5KDR.pdf US Supreme Court brief by Council for Responsible Genetics (February 2013)]
**[http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41800.pdf Congressional Research Service: DNA Testing in Criminal Justice: Background, Current Law, Grants, and Issues (6th December 2012)]
**[http://www.afmes.mil/index.cfm?pageid=afdil.afrssir.overview Armed Forces Repository of Specimen Samples for the Identification of Remains (AFRSSIR)]
**[http://www.promega.co.uk/~/media/files/resources/conference%20proceedings/ishi%2023/oral%20presentations/03-hares.pdf?la=en Hares DR (2012): Overview of the FBI's CODIS Program]
**[http://www.promega.co.uk/~/media/files/resources/conference%20proceedings/ishi%2023/oral%20presentations/24-kreikemeier.pdf?la=en Kreikemeier MA (2012) Touch DNA: A National Survey of Submission Policies and Laboratory Procedures]
**[https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/04/dhs-considers-collecting-dna-kids-dea-and-us-marshals-already-do Electronic Frontier Foundation: DHS Considers Collecting DNA From Kids; DEA and US Marshals Already Do (14th May 2012)]
** [http://www.dnaresource.com/unitedstates.html DNA Resource: United States] State by state laws, on the DNAResource website, run by Gordon Thomas Honeywell Governmental Affairs and sponsored by DNA testing company Life Technologies.
**[https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/232197.pdf National Institute of Justice: Making Sense of DNA Backlogs, 2010 — Myths vs. Reality (February 2011)]
**[http://nij.gov/topics/forensics/lab-operations/evidence-backlogs/pages/backlog-reduction-program.aspx National Institute of Justice: DNA Backlog Reduction Program]
**[http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/jason/hundred.pdf JASON: The USD100 genome: implications for the DoD (December 2010)]
**[http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/FBI/a0632/final.pdf US Department of Justice: Combined DNA Index System Operational and Laboratory Vulnerabilities (May 2006)]
**[http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-109hr3402enr/pdf/BILLS-109hr3402enr.pdf Violence against Women Act 2005]
**[http://www.justice.gov/olp/pdf/jfaa2004.pdf Justice for All Act 2004]
**[http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/chapter-136/subchapter-IX/part-A DNA Identification Act 1994]
* Press articles
**[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2609599/Serial-rapists-walk-free-Detroit-9-000-rape-kits-remain-untested-5-YEARS-discovered-abandoned-police-warehouse.html Daily Mail: Serial rapists walk free in Detroit as up to 9,000 rape kits remain untested 5 YEARS after being discovered abandoned in a police warehouse (21st April 2014)]
**[http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/21/detroit-rape-kits-backlog/7954957/ USA Today: Detroit rape kit testing backlog lingers (21st April 2014)]
**[http://www.freep.com/article/20140421/NEWS06/304210022/old-rape-kits-not-tested-Detroit-police Detroit Free Press: As Detroit rape kits sit untested, justice for victims is denied (21st April 2014)]
**[http://nypost.com/2014/04/20/dna-swab-kits-to-help-mta-bus-drivers-bust-spitters/ New York Post: DNA swab kits to help MTA bus drivers bust spitters (20th April 2014)]
**[http://www.bestofneworleans.com/gambit/rape-kit-testing-in-louisiana/Content?oid=2416575 Rape kit testing in Louisiana (7th April 2014)]
**[http://www.psmag.com/navigation/politics-and-law/identity-online-77848/ Pacific Standard: Do You Own Your Identity Online? (4th April 2014)]
**[http://newark.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/congressman-asks-fbi-to-reduce-backlog-of-untested-rape-kits Newark Patch: Congressman Asks FBI to Reduce Backlog of Untested Rape Kits (3rd April 2014)]
**[http://midweekwire.com/2014/04/02/the-science-of-safety/ The Midweek Wire: The science of safety (2nd April 2014)]
**[http://blog.al.com/wire/2014/04/dna_testing_could_become_part.html Al.com: DNA testing could become part of security clearance procedure for federal workers (1st April 2013)]
**[http://www.ktvb.com/news/politics/New-law-limits-DNA-collection-253488391.html KTVB: New law limits DNA collection in Idaho (1st April 2014)]
**[http://www.navytimes.com/article/20140331/NEWS/303310047/Hagel-orders-overhaul-remains-recovery-mission Navy Times: Hagel orders overhaul of remains recovery mission (31st March 2014)]
**[http://www.genomicslawreport.com/index.php/2014/03/31/judicial-and-legislative-reactions-in-california-to-maryland-v-king/ Genomics Law Report: Judicial and Legislative Reactions in California to Maryland v. King, 133 S. Ct. 158 (2013) (31st March 2013)]
**[http://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2014/03/26/mike-honda-asks-house-committee-to-remove-barriers-for-reducing-rape-kit-backlog East Bay Express: Mike Honda Asks House Committee to Remove Barriers for Reducing Rape Kit Backlog (26th March 2014)]
**[http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/2014/03/26/columbus-crime-lab-problems-found-DNA-reporting.html WBNS-10TV: 3,000 DNA Test Results To Be Reviewed At Columbus Crime Lab (26th March 2014)]
**[https://blogs.law.stanford.edu/lawandbiosciences/2014/03/21/breaking-news-ninth-circuit-en-banc-opinion-affirms-haskell-v-harris/ Stanford Law School Blog: Breaking News - Ninth Circuit En Banc Opinion “Affirms” Haskell v. Harris (21st March 2014)]
**[http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304026304579453581126722834?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304026304579453581126722834.html Wall Street Journal: California DNA Collection Law Upheld by Court (21st March 2014)]
**[http://blog.sfgate.com/crime/2014/03/20/court-keeps-dna-law-but-suit-still-alive/ Court keeps DNA law, but suit still alive (20th March 2014)]
**[http://alpenhornnews.com/san-bernardino-countys-dna-backlog-p4832-139.htm The Alpenhorn News: San Bernardino County’s DNA backlog (18th March 2014)]
**[http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/assembly-should-join-senate-to-adjust-dna-collection-law-b99224564z1-250250051.html Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel: Assembly should join Senate to adjust DNA collection law (13th March 2014)]
**[http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/senate-tuesday-to-make-changes-to-dnr-collection-law-b99222877z1-249573181.html Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel: Senate quickly makes unexpected changes to DNA-collection law (11th March 2014)]
**[http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2014/03/11/firm-to-help-police-analyze-dna-found-in-east-liberty-double-murder/ CBS Pittsburgh: Firm To Help Police Analyze DNA Found In East Liberty Double Murder (11th March 2014)]
**[http://siouxcityjournal.com/lee-wire/law-enforcement-sees-new-iowa-dna-law-as-crime-fighting/article_6fb68352-7136-51d8-987c-87f01cd43165.html Sioux City Journal: Law enforcement sees new Iowa DNA law as crime-fighting tool (11th March 2014)]
**[http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20140310/NEWS01/303100055/Cases-illustrate-possible-pitfalls-untested-kits?nclick_check=1 LSJ: Cases illustrate possible pitfalls of untested kits (10th March 2014)]
**[http://motherboard.vice.com/read/genetic-profiling-and-predictive-policing-are-taking-us-to-the-pre-crime-future Mother Board: Genetic Profiling and Predictive Policing Are Taking Us to the Pre-Crime Future (6th March 2014)]
**[http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/capitol_report/oklahoma-house-rejects-bill-to-expand-dna-database/article_2c7b9258-a498-11e3-9aaf-001a4bcf6878.html AP: Oklahoma House rejects bill to expand DNA database (5th March 2014)]
**[http://www.post-gazette.com/local/region/2014/03/01/Crime-lab-to-address-mixtures-of-DNA/stories/201403010085 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Allegheny County crime lab vying to use more advanced DNA database (28th February 2014)]
**[http://kgab.com/committee-narrows-katies-law-dna-testing-bill/ Associated Press: Committee Narrows "Katie's Law" DNA Testing Bill (19th February 2014)]
**[http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/Rape-kit-testing-backlog-undermines-justice-for-5242949.php SFGate: Rape kit testing backlog undermines justice for victims (17th February 2014)]
**[http://www.marshallparthenon.com/news/mu-forensic-science-center-collects-dna-of-criminals-across-the-country-1.2856637#.UwtVvIWadMR The Parthenon: MU Forensic Science Center collects DNA of criminals across the country (17th February 2014)]
**[http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/why-criminal-dna-records-should-be-public MotherBoard: Why Criminal DNA Records Should Be Public (3rd February 2014)]
**[http://www.omaha.com/article/20140203/NEWS/140209633/1694 Omaha.com: Iowa law means more must give DNA samples (3rd February 2014)]
**[http://www.usatoday.com/story/nation/2014/01/27/rapid-dna-scanning-technology/4828285/ USA Today: Pentagon, scientists closing in on rapid DNA technology (27th January 2014)]
**[http://members.jacksonville.com/news/georgia/2014-01-27/story/federal-grant-could-fund-dna-database-could-solve-cold-cases-free The Florida Times-Union: Federal grant could fund DNA database that could solve cold cases, free wrongly convicted (27th January 2014)]
**[http://siouxcityjournal.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/law-enforcement-sees-new-iowa-dna-law-as-crime-fighting/article_171184c5-d882-5ee3-b891-2a123892659a.html Sioux City Journal: Genes and crime scenes (25th January 2014)]
**[http://www.upi.com/Science_News/Technology/2014/01/25/166-errors-found-in-national-DNA-database/UPI-99611390684302/?spt=rln&or=1 UPI: 166 errors found in national DNA database (25th January 2014)]
**[http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/25/nyregion/fbi-audit-of-database-that-indexes-dna-finds-errors-in-profiles.html?_r=0 New York Times: F.B.I. Audit of Database That Indexes DNA Finds Errors in Profiles (24th January 2014)]
**[http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_24887979/problem-dna-robot-led-denver-police-dna-mix Problem with DNA robot led to Denver police DNA mix-up (10th January 2014]
**[http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-grim-sleeper-20140108,0,493058.story#axzz2ppLlLKJM DNA evidence in Grim Sleeper case was taken legally, judge rules (7th January 2014)]
**[http://www.govtech.com/public-safety/DNA-Registry-Would-Help-Solve-Crimes-in-Pennsylviania-Police-Prosecutors-Say.html DNA Registry Would Help Solve Crimes in Pennsylviania, Police, Prosecutors Say (6th January 2014)]
**[http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/2/5266196/is-dna-analysis-stuck-in-the-past The Verge: Is DNA analysis stuck in the past? (2nd January 2014)]
**[http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/57325569-78/rape-kits-lab-police.html.csp The Salt Lake Tribune: Utah Police Agencies Have Stockpiles of Unprocessed Rape Kits (1st January 2014)]
**[http://www.bristolpress.com/articles/2013/12/28/news/doc52bf99acd5e1e127118620.txt A look at why it took 6 years for ‘Jane Doe 2’ to be identified (28th December 2013)]
**[http://surfky.com/index.php/news/kentucky/42190-department-of-corrections-issues-comprehensive-action-plan-to-improve-felon-dna-collection SurfKY.com: Department of Corrections Issues Comprehensive Action Plan to Improve Felon DNA Collection (11th December 2013)]
**[http://www.journalnow.com/news/local/article_796709b4-ff8a-50f2-9747-7e4234af44cc.html Winston-Salem Journal: Computers work overtime in crime lab (26th December 2013)]
**[http://www.miamiok.com/news/article_850c69ff-be25-5516-889c-04dec9bbe26e.html Miami OK.com: Should Oklahoma Collect DNA from Arrestees? (20th December 2013)]
**[http://www.newsreview.com/chico/in-the-dark-no-longer/content?oid=12196692 In the dark no longer: Butte County streamlines DNA-testing process in cases of sexual violence (5th December 2013)]
**[http://www.theledger.com/article/20131130/NEWSCHIEF/131139971?tc=ar The Ledger: Forensic DNA Use Has Exploded as Agencies Use It Even in Everyday Crimes (2nd December 2013)]
**[http://www.homelandsecuritynewswire.com/pentagon-maintains-dna-database-80000-dna-profiles Homeland Security News Wire: Pentagon maintains a DNA database with 80,000 DNA profiles (15th December 2013)]
**[http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_24672342/californias-dna-collection-law-key-legal-test San Jose Mercury News: California's DNA Collection Law in Key Legal Test (9th December 2013)]
**[http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/Nov/27/dna-sample-police-settlement/ U-T San Diego: DNA sample concerns spur new police system (3rd December 2013)]
**[http://washingtonexaminer.com/new-questions-raised-about-mandatory-dna-swabbing-by-police/article/2539523 Washington Examiner: New questions raised about mandatory DNA swabbing by police (20th November 2013)]
**[http://chronicle.augusta.com/news/government/2013-11-11/senator-says-bill-will-boost-dna-hits Augusta Chronicle: Senator says bill will boost DNA hits (11th November 2013)]
**[http://www.dailygazette.com/weblogs/foss/2013/oct/19/public-debates-dna-issue-and-so-do-i/ Daily Gazette: Public debates the DNA issue - and so do I (19th October 2013)]
**[http://iowapublicradio.org/post/das-office-asks-dna-exchange-dropped-charges Iowa Public Radio: DA's Office Asks For DNA In Exchange For Dropped Charges (9th October 2013)]
**[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323893004579059760205212256.html Democratic Underground: More DNA Samples, More Debate (23rd September 2013)]
**[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/science/dna-double-take.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 New York Times: Double Take (16th September 2013)]
**[http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/DNA-test-put-on-trial-4815368.php#page-1 Times Union: DNA test put on trial (16th September 2013)]
**[http://www.genomicslawreport.com/index.php/2013/08/19/ninth-circuit-orders-rehearing-of-haskell-v-harris/ Genomics Law Report: Ninth Circuit Orders Rehearing of Haskell v. Harris (19th August 2013)]
**[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/18/us/some-worry-over-a-law-to-increase-dna-testing.html Texas Tribune: Some Worry Over a Law to Increase DNA Testing (17th August 2013)]
**[http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2013/08/14/dick_hickock_perry_smith_dna_testing_doesn_t_link_in_cold_blood_killers.html Slate: Why DNA Testing Failed to Link the In Cold Blood Killers to a Gruesome Murder in Florida (14th August 2013)]
**[http://esciencenews.com/articles/2013/08/14/forensic.familial.search.methods.carry.risk.certain.false.matches e! Science News: Forensic familial search methods carry risk of certain false matches (14th August 2013)] There is a [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpmlVuRPiRA video abstract] and [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO5-Ah1dr5s general public explanation video] available for this research
**[http://www.fiercegovernment.com/story/justice-department-lacks-information-dna-backlog-report-says/2013-08-12 Fierce Government: Justice Department lacks information on DNA backlog, report says (12th August 2013)]
**[http://forensicpsychologist.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/new-analyses-undermine-perception-of.html ForensicPsychologistBlogspot: New analyses undermine perception of DNA infallibility (2nd August 2013)]
**[http://rt.com/usa/clerk-fired-dna-evidence-innocence-875/ RT: Clerk who helped inmate exonerate himself with DNA evidence fired (1st August 2013)]
**[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/25/opinion/high-tech-high-risk-forensics.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1& New York Times: High-Tech, High-Risk Forensics (24th July 2013)]
**[http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/07/11/family-albert-desalvo-angry-that-police-secretly-obtained-dna-sample-from-relative/uWTghWSakCKJO8Ee3SEARI/story.html Boston Globe: Family of confessed Boston Strangler angry over DNA sample (11th July 2013)]
**[http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/06/28/south-bay-paramedics-likely-brought-innocent-mans-dna-to-crime-scene/ CBS: SF Bay Area: South Bay Paramedics Likely Brought Innocent Man's DNA To Murder Scene (28th June 2013)]
**[http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/How-innocent-man-s-DNA-was-found-at-killing-scene-4624971.php SFGate: How innocent man's DNA was found at killing scene (26th June 2013)]
**[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/13/us/police-agencies-are-assembling-records-of-dna.html?_r=0 New York Times: Police Agencies Are Assembling Records of DNA (12th June 2013)]
**[http://cen.acs.org/articles/91/i23/DNA-Ruling-Raises-Science-Concerns.html Chemical and Engineering News: DNA Ruling Raises Science Concerns (10th June 2013)]
**[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-03/routine-dna-testing-after-arrest-upheld-by-u-s-supreme-court.html Bloomberg: Routine DNA Testing After Arrest Upheld by Top U.S. Court (3rd June 2013)]
**[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-03/court-s-dna-ruling-brings-u-s-a-step-closer-to-gattaca-.html Bloomberg: Court's DNA Ruling Brings U.S. a Step Closer to 'Gattaca' (3rd June 2013)]
**[http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/dna-testing-pioneer-resigns-medical-examiner-office-article-1.1345383 New York Daily News: Pioneer in DNA testing quits Medical Examiner's Office over lab violations (16th May 2013)]
**[http://physics.scsu.edu/~dscott/gen/ScientificAmerican/The%20Government%20Wants%20Your%20DNA.pdf Scientific American: The Government wants your DNA (March 2013)]
**[http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130227/POLITICS03/302270368/Justices-mixed-DNA-database?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|Entertainment|p Detroit News: Justices mixed on DNA database (27th February 2013)]
**[http://www.genengnews.com/insight-and-intelligence/dna-collection-v-dna-privacy/77899774/ Genetic Engineering News: DNA Collection v. DNA Privacy (27th February 2013)]
**[http://www.wfpl.org/post/supreme-court-considers-if-warrantless-dna-swab-violates-constitution WFPL News: Supreme Court Considers If Warrantless DNA Swab Violates Constitution (26th February 2013)]
**[http://www.fiercegovernment.com/story/justice-proposes-forensic-science-governing-body/2013-02-25 Fierce Government: Justice proposes forensic science governing body (25th February 2013)]
**[http://mcalesternews.com/offbeatnews/x964904200/Why-collecting-DNA-from-people-who-are-arrested-wont-solve-more-crimes McAlester News: Why collecting DNA from people who are arrested won't solve more crimes (16th February 2013)]
**[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/01/nyregion/more-dna-problems-found-in-new-york-city-crime-lab.html?_r=1& New York Times: Mishandling of DNA Evidence Is Found in Over 50 Cases at Crime Lab (31st January 2013)]
**[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/nyregion/new-york-reviewing-over-800-rape-cases-for-possible-mishandling-of-dna-evidence.html?smid=tw-nytimesscience&seid=auto&_r=1& New York Times: New York Examines Over 800 Rape Cases for Possible Mishandling of Evidence (10th January 2013)]
**[http://www.rightsidenews.com/2013010731709/us/homeland-security/rapid-dna-coming-soon-to-a-police-department-or-immigration-office-near-you.html Right Side News: Rapid DNA: Coming Soon to a Police Department or Immigration Office Near You (7th January 2013)]
**[http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-11-09/news/bs-md-scotus-dna-20121109_1_maryland-s-dna-dna-samples-king-s-dna Baltimore Sun: Supreme Court will review Md. DNA law (9th November 2012)]
**[http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/11/scotus-genetic-privacy/ Wired: Supreme Court Weighing Genetic Privacy (8th November 2012)]
**[http://www.thenorthwestern.com/article/20121022/APC0101/310220144/Expanded-DNA-collection-draws-fire?odyssey=tab|mostpopular|text|FRONTPAGE The NorthWestern: Expanded DNA collection draws fire (22nd October 2012)]
**[http://www.postcrescent.com/article/20121022/APC0101/310220144/0/wis0110/Expanded-DNA-collection-draws-fire?nclick_check=1 PostCresent.com (Wisconsin): Expanded DNA collection draws fire (21st October 2012)]
**[http://www.govtech.com/public-safety/Will-Private-DNA-Services-Replace-State-Crime-Labs.html Government Technology: Will Private DNA Services Replace State Crime Labs? (11th October 2012)]
**[http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/11/us-usa-geneticprivacy-idUSBRE89A06H20121011 Reuters: Citing privacy concerns, U.S. panel urges end to secret DNA testing (11th October 2012)]
**[http://www.vvdailypress.com/opinion/dna-36897-felony-sample.html VV Daily Press: No DNA samples without a conviction (2nd October 2012)]
**[http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/amy-macpherson/freemason_b_1906521.html?just_reloaded=1 Huffington Post: Why Are the Freemasons Collecting Our Children's DNA? (26th September 2012)]
**[http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/security/3381969/fbi-eager-embrace-mobile-rapid-dna-testing/ PC Advisor: FBI eager to embrace mobile 'Rapid DNA' testing (18th September 2012)]
**[http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/12/nyregion/suspected-dna-link-to-2004-killing-was-the-result-of-a-lab-error.html?_r=1&emc=eta1 New York Times: DNA Match Tying Protest to 2004 Killing Is Doubted (11th July 2012)]
**[http://rt.com/usa/news/dna-collection-kids-dhs-722/ RT: Kids' DNA collection? Possible with Homeland Security (20th May 2012)]
**[http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-04-24/news/bs-md-court-ruling-dna-20120424_1_dna-collection-dna-samples-violent-crimes-and-burglaries Baltimore Sun: Md. high court strikes down DNA collection at arrest (24th April 2012)]
** [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15311718 BBC: FBI's DNA database upgrade plans come under fire (17th October 2011)]
**[http://www.officer.com/news/10369150/dna-mix-up-leads-to-rape-case-review-in-florida Officer.com: DNA Mix Up Leads to Rape Case Review in Florida (27th September 2011)]
** [http://pottsmerc.com/articles/2011/09/20/news/doc4e78b7cfa098e912177915.txt The Pottsdown Mercury: Convicted murderer wins court battle for DNA tests of evidence (20th September 2011)]
** [http://www.boston.com/Boston/metrodesk/2011/08/appeals-court-says-cape-prosecutors-must-show-they-need-dna-profiles-worthington-witnesses/VDFsHvpTgMJTJLks6UGCuN/index.html Boston Globe: Court says state can't hold DNA (26th August 2011)]
** [http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/08/04/BALP1KJGRI.DTL San Francisco Chronicle: DNA: Law requiring arrestees' samples struck down (5th August 2011)]
**[http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/jul/25/man-wrongly-convicted-after-dna-mix--awarded-15-mi/ Las Vegas Sun: Man wrongly convicted after a DNA mix-up awarded USD1.5 million (25th July 2011)]
** [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/25/illinois-dna-collection_n_867088.html Huffington Post: Illinois Bill Could Allow State To Collect DNA From Those Presumed Innocent, Marking Nationwide Shift (26th May 2011)]
**[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123810863649052551.html Wall Street Journal: Genes draw likenesses of suspects (27th March 2009)]
**[http://gulfnews.com/about-gulf-news/al-nisr-portfolio/weekend-review/articles/incriminating-proof-1.40842 Washington Post: Incriminating proof (15th January 2009)]
** [http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2008/11/dna_database.html FAS Project on Government Secrecy: Joint Intelligence DNA Database Described (18th November 2008)]
** [http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/30574726-b4fe-11dd-b780-0000779fd18c.html#axzz1DJH6xARi Financial Times: Fears over covert DNA database (17th November 2008)]
**[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/04/17/ST2008041701676.html Washington Post: US to expand collection of crime suspects’ DNA (17th April 2008)]

==Detailed analysis==

The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) Combined DNA Index System program (CODIS) enables federal, state and local laboratories to store and compare DNA profiles electronically and thereby link serial crimes to each other and identify suspects by matching DNA from crime scenes to convicted offenders or arrestees (where state legislation allows this). All 50 states and the FBI now collect DNA samples, retain the profiles generated from those samples in the databases, and compare the database entries against DNA profiles of biological evidence. There are obviously differences amongst the states as to collection criteria, sample retention and removal of entries from the databases. It is impossible to give a complete overview of the position in each state in this paper and the aim is merely to briefly summarise the contents of the main pieces of legislation and to highlight trends amongst states.

Legislation:

* '''The DNA Identification Act, 1994,''' allows for DNA identification records to be kept of: (a) Persons convicted of crimes, this will vary from State to State in accordance with the DNA database laws of each State; (b) DNA samples recovered from crime scenes; (c) DNA samples recovered from unidentified human remains; and (d) DNA samples voluntarily contributed from relatives of missing persons. (Refer to See 42 U.S.C.S. §14132(a).).
* The''' Justice for All Act, 2004,''' allows for the retention in the National DNA Index System (NDIS) of DNA profiles from persons who have been charged in an indictment, even if the charges are eventually dropped or not pursued. The Act affects the qualifying offences for entry onto the National DNA database. Previously these were limited to sexual offences and other serious violent crimes, but have been amended to include "any felony". In terms of the Act, DNA profiles may not be uploaded to the NDIS if: (a) The arrestee has not been charged; or (b) DNA samples have been submitted voluntarily for the purposes of elimination from a crime sample.
* The''' Violence Against Women Act, 2005, '''allows for the uploading of an arrestee's DNA profile into the NDIS at the same time that their fingerprints are taken and uploaded onto the national fingerprint database. Previously DNA could not be uploaded until the arrestee was charged or indicted. The Act removes the burden from the State to remove an arrestee sample from the NDIS if the arrestee was later acquitted or if the charges were dismissed. The burden shifts onto the arrestee, who will be required to file a certified copy of a final court order establishing that all indexable charges have been dismissed, resulted in acquittal or that no charges were filed. The Act allows the Federal Government to take and retain DNA samples from Federal arrestees and from non-U.S. citizens or permanent residents who are detained under Federal authority. The Act gives the Attorney General the authority to issue regulations requiring the collection of such DNA profiles including requiring other Federal agencies to collect these: e.g. immigration agencies.

Who must provide a sample:<ref name="ftn1"> See http://www.ncsl.org/programs/cj/dnadatabanks.htm “State Laws on DNA Data Banks Qualifying Offenses, Others Who must provide sample” (July 2008).

</ref>

* Twelve states: Alaska, Arizona, California, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia – now have laws authorizing arrestee sampling.
* All 50 states require that convicted sex offenders provide a DNA sample, and states are increasingly expanding these policies to include all felons or many serious felony offenders. To date (July 2008), 46 states require that all convicted felons provide a DNA sample to the state’s database.
* Eleven states to date specify certain misdemeanors among those who must provide a sample.
* There are 28 states that include DNA from delinquent juveniles in the database, of these there are 12 states that restrict the scope of qualifying offences with regard to juveniles. For example, California provides that qualifying offences are the same for adult convicts and juvenile delinquents, but juvenile arrestees, unlike adults, are excluded from the database.

Retention of information and samples:<ref name="ftn2"> See Survey of State DNA Database Statutes (2004) available at www.aslme.org/dna_04/grid/guide.pdf.

</ref>

* Thirty-eight states contain statutes that detail expungement criteria and procedure. DNA samples and records are expunged upon a change in the disposition of the case in the convict’s favor, provided that the offender has not been convicted of a separate qualifying offence. The state statutes differ, however, in the extent to which the disposition of the case must change before expungement proceedings begin. Some states only require that the defendant’s conviction be reversed, whereas others require that the conviction be reversed and the case dismissed. Of the 38 statutes that detail the expungement procedure, 33 require the offender to initiate the process. Of these 33 it is only Texas that contains a statutory provision requiring the defendant to be advised after his acquittal of his right to expungement.
* The criteria for retention vary from immediate removal, if a sample is not used, to retention of a sample for at least 35 years, to permanent retention for certain specified offences.

In general, the statutes authorize use of DNA and the database for law enforcement purposes, and for purposes of maintaining and improving the database. However, in certain states the creation of population statistical databases, tools which allow for the statistical analysis and interpretation of anonymous DNA profiles collected from convicted offenders, are established. DNA databases in the US typically authorize certain uses of offender’s genetic information and prohibit unauthorized uses and are therefore usually exempted from genetic privacy laws. The DNA statutes of the states also differ with regard to the criminal and civil liabilities provided therein for the misuse of the DNA database. Typically criminal penalties are imposed for: a) tampering with the DNA samples or records; b) improper entry of DNA samples and records into the database; c) improper access to and use of DNA samples and records; and d) improper disclosure of DNA samples and records. Only seven states provide for a private cause of action for individuals aggrieved by the misuse of the database and four states explicitly provide immunity from civil and / or criminal liability for misuse of the database.

----
<references/>

Ireland

2014-04-23T17:50:12Z

86.132.109.236:

Ireland plans to establish a DNA database to meet its obligations under the European Union's Pruem Decisions (which require sharing of DNA profile matches across borders in the EU).
A Bill published in 2010 was delayed until after the Irish elections in February 2011, and was substantially revised before publication in September 2013. The Bill includes provisions for collection of DNA and fingerprints on arrest for offences carrying potential sentences of 5 years or more. It also allows for DNA match sharing agreements with other states (likely to mean the USA).

== Resources ==
* External links
**[http://www.ihrc.ie/download/pdf/final_obs_on_the_dna_crim_justice_bill_2013_doc_ff.pdf IHRC: Observations on the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence and DNA Database System) Bill 2013 (March 2014)]
**[https://www.europol.europa.eu/content/memberpage/ireland-767 Europol: Ireland]
** [http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2013100900016?opendocument Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence and DNA Database System) Bill 2013: Second Stage (9th October 2013)] Introduction of the Bill and first debate.
** [http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/PR13000335 Department of Justice and Equality: Minister Shatter publishes legislation to establish long-awaited DNA database (11th September 2013)]
** [http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=24305&&CatID=59 Houses of the Oireachtas: Bill Number 93 of 2013] Procedure and documents to download as the Bill is amended.
** [http://www.iccl.ie/news/2013/09/11/watchdog-calls-for-privacy-guarantees-on-dna-data-sharing.html ICCL: Watchdog calls for privacy guarantees on DNA data sharing (11th September 2013)]
** [http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/bills/2013/9313/b9313d.pdf Ireland: Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence and DNA Database System) Bill 2013 (11th September 2013)]
** [http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/bills/2013/9313/b9313dmemo.pdf Ireland DNA Bill: Explanatory Memorandum (11th September 2013)]
** [http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/PR13000335 Department of Justice and Equality: Minister Shatter publishes legislation to establish long-awaited DNA database (11th September 2013)]
** [http://ulir.ul.ie/handle/10344/3258 O'Dwyer: DNA and the criminal process: 'striking the right balance': the case for a 'reflective' approach (2013)]
** [http://www.humanrights.ie/index.php/2011/02/28/guest-post-irish-innocence-project/ Human Rights in Ireland Guest Post: Irish Innocence Project and DNA databases (28th February 2011)]
** [http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/evidence/dna_evidence.html Citizens Information: DNA evidence (February 2011)]
** [http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=13886 Ireland: CRIMINAL JUSTICE (FORENSIC EVIDENCE AND DNA DATABASE SYSTEM) BILL 2010]
** [http://aberdeen.academia.edu/LizCampbell/Papers/164283/The_Development_of_a_DNA_Database_in_Ireland_-_Assessing_the_Proposed_Legislation Campbell L (2010) The Development of a DNA Database in Ireland - Assessing the Proposed Legislation. Irish Law Times]
** [http://humanrights.ie/civil-liberties/blog-carnival-some-pros-and-cons-of-the-dna-database-system-bill-2010/ Blog Carnival - Some Pros and Cons of the DNA Database System Bill 2010 (4th May 2010)]
** [http://www.iccl.ie/news/2010/01/19/rights-watchdog-to-scrutinise-privacy-safeguards-in-dna-database-bill.html ICCL: Rights watchdog to scrutinise privacy safeguards in DNA Database Bill (19th January 2010)]
** [http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.1/irish-law-dna-database EDRI: An Irish law for a DNA Database (13th January 2010)]
** [http://www.rte.ie/science/forensic.pdf Irish Council for Bioethics: In your blood: Forensic DNA databases (2007)]
** [http://www.lawreform.ie/_fileupload/Reports/rDNADatabase.pdf Law Reform Commission: The establishment of a DNA database (2005)]
** [http://www.iccl.ie/-human-rights-compatibility-of-a-dna-database-.html ICCL: Human Rights Compatibility of a DNA Database (10th October 2003)]
** [http://www.iccl.ie/-iccl-position-paper-on-the-establishment-of-a-dna-database-2003.html ICCL Position Paper on the Establishment of a DNA Database 2003 (1st October 2003)]
* Press articles
**[http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/human-rights-body-warns-over-mass-dna-screening-1.1759048 The Irish Times: Human rights body warns over mass DNA screening (11th April 2014)]
**[http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/dna-database-moves-a-step-closer-261786.html Irish Examiner: DNA database moves a step closer (13th March 2014)]
**[http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/dna-database-bill-critically-important-says-shatter-1.1722084 Irish Times: DNA database Bill critically important, says Shatter (12th March 2014)]
** [http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/dna-database-could-help-prevent-500m-in-stock-being-shoplifted-29717304.html Independent: DNA database could help prevent Euros500m in stock being shoplifted (1st November 2013)]
** [http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/shatter-introduces-landmark-dna-database-bill-1.1555552 Irish Times: Shatter introduces 'landmark' DNA database Bill (9th October 2013)]
** [http://www.thejournal.ie/oireachtas-agenda-gambling-dna-budget-1119693-Oct2013/ The Journal: Overhanging trees, gambling and everything else happening in Leinster House today (9th October 2013)]
** [http://www.thejournal.ie/alan-shatter-dna-database-crime-human-rights-1121319-Oct2013/ The Journal: Shatter: DNA database strikes balance between tackling crime and respecting human rights (9th October 2013)]
** [http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gardai-get-power-to-retain-dna-for-six-years-on-new-database-29573185.html Independent: Gardai get power to retain DNA for six years on new database (12th September 2013)]
** [http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/republic-of-ireland/dna-data-to-respect-human-rights-29571344.html Belfast Telegraph: DNA data 'to respect human rights' (12th September 2013) ]
** [http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/considered-and-informed-debate-about-a-dna-database-is-vital-1079611-Sep2013/ The Journal: Column: Considered and informed debate about a DNA database is vital (12th September 2013)]
** [http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/reworked-dna-bill-seeks-balance-between-privacy-and-better-crime-detection-1.1524274 The Irish Times: Reworked DNA Bill seeks balance between privacy and better crime detection (12th September 2013)]
** [http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/planned-law-requires-supervigilance-on-our-part-29573337.html Independent: Planned law requires super-vigilance on our part (12th September 2013)]
** [http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0911/473479-dna-database/ RTE: Sex offenders will be required to register DNA profiles for new database (12th September 2013)]
** [http://www.thejournal.ie/poll-dna-database-1078447-Sep2013/ The Journal: Poll: Is a DNA database a good idea? (11th September 2013)]
** [http://www.build.ie/national_news.asp?newsid=168878 Build.ie: Minister Publishes Data To Set Up A DNA Database (11th September 2013)]
** [http://www.independent.ie/videos/irish-news/shatter-publishes-bill-to-allow-setting-up-of-dna-database-29572007.html Irish Independent: Shatter publishes bill to allow setting up of DNA database (11th September 2013)]
** [http://www.thejournal.ie/dna-database-1079092-Sep2013/ The Journal: DNA database is one more tool that will help catch perpetrators, says RCNI (11th September 2013)]
** [http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/new-dna-database-will-have-profiles-of-1000-sex-offenders-29571368.html Independent: New DNA database will have profiles of 1,000 sex offenders (11th September 2013)]
** [http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/crime/justice-minister-alan-shatter-introduce-2266149 Irish Mirror: Minister Shatter to introduce DNA criminal database in new bill (11th September 2013)]
** [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24045905 BBC: DNA database to become operational in Republic of Ireland (11th September 2013)]
** [http://www.newstalk.ie/DNA-Database:-How-DNA-profiling-works- NewsTalk: DNA profiling: What it is and how it works (11th September 2013)]
** [http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/criminals-convicted-of-serious-offences-to-have-dna-taken-1.1523328 The Irish Times: Criminals convicted of serious offences to have DNA taken (11th September 2013)]
** [http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/gbaugbojojid/ BreakingNews.ie: Shatter: New DNA database 'will respect human rights' (11th September 2013)]
** [http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/dna-database-is-welcome-but-it-will-need-safeguards-29563347.html Irish Independent: DNA database is welcome but it will need safeguards (9th September 2013)]
** [http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/legislation-on-dna-database-due-next-week-29557182.html Irish Independent: Legislation on DNA database due next week (6th September 2013)]
** [http://www.build.ie/national_news.asp?newsid=168671 Build.ie: Shatter To Publish DNA Database Bill (6th September 2013)]
** [http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/criminals-will-be-forced-to-give-dna-sample-under-new-legislation-1.1517882 Irish Times: Criminals will be forced to give DNA sample under new legislation (6th September 2013)]
** [http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0905/472482-dail-reform/ RTE: Cabinet discusses Dail reform and DNA database (5th September 2013)]
** [http://www.dublinpeople.com/article.php?id=2663&l=100 Dublin People: Minister prepares to bring in DNA database for assault (5th August 2013)]
** [http://www.herald.ie/news/shatter-to-launch-dna-database-29448654.html Herald: Shatter to launch DNA database (25th July 2013)]
** [http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0725/464571-dna/ RTE: Sentence length 'irrelevant' for DNA database (25th July 2013)]
** [http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0724/464357-dna-database/ RTE: Legislation to allow for DNA database expected in September (24th July 2013)]
** [http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1025/missing-campaign-dna.html#video RTE News: Group wants DNA database for missing persons (25th October 2012)]
** [http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/0919/1224324160802.html Irish Times: DNA database (19th September 2012)]
** [http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0917/1224324089281.html Irish Times: Lack of DNA database is a national disgrace (17th September 2012)]
** [http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/0825/1224322962393.html Irish Times: National DNA database needed to tackle crime (25th August 2012)]
** [http://www.independent.ie/national-news/lack-of-dna-database-lets-criminals-off-hook-say-top-investigators-3105455.html Irish Independent: Lack of DNA database lets criminals off hook, say top investigators (12th May 2012)]
** [http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0511/1224315908049.html Irish Times: State urged to take DNA from remains of unidentified people (11th May 2012)]
** [http://www.herald.ie/news/detectives-get-massive-boost-with-move-to-dna-database-2995989.html Herald: Detectives get massive boost with move to DNA database (21st January 2012)]
** [http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sciencetoday/2011/0929/1224304927476.html Irish Times: CSI Dublin (29th September 2011)]
** [http://www.thejournal.ie/prisoners-will-be-forced-to-give-dna-samples-for-national-crime-database-report-129120-Apr2011/ The Journal: Prisoners will be forced to give DNA samples for national crime database - report (30th April 2011)]
** [http://www.thejournal.ie/shatter-to-prioritise-laws-creating-national-dna-database-124385-Apr2011/ The Journal: Shatter to prioritise laws creating national DNA database (21st April 2011)]
** [http://www.independent.ie/national-news/anticorruption-law-to-tackle-rogue-bankers-2568382.html Irish Independent: Anti-corruption law to tackle rogue bankers (7th March 2011)] Reports that the new Irish Government "will press ahead with the long-awaited DNA database to help the investigation of serious sexual and violent offences".
** [http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0429/1224269287886.html The Irish Times: Call to destroy DNA profiles of people not charged or acquitted (29th April 2010)]
** [http://www.sbpost.ie/news/ireland/concerns-over-holding-criminals-dna-data-46688.html The Sunday Business Post: Concerns over holding criminals' DNA data (10th January 2010)]
** [http://www.independent.ie/national-news/gardai-get-new-powers-to-collect-dna-from-bodies-1983261.html Independent: Gardai get new powers to collect DNA from bodies (21st December 2009)]
** [http://www.sbpost.ie/news/ireland/new-dna-bill-faces-opposition-46369.html The Post: New DNA bill faces opposition (20th December 2009)]
** [http://www.sbpost.ie/news/suspects-forced-to-give-dna-samples-under-new-legislation-46388.html The Post: Suspects forced to give DNA samples under new legislation (20th December 2009)]
** [http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/ireland/national-dna-database-to-be-created-438989.html IrelandOnline: National DNA database to be created (20th December 2009)]
** [http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/1210/1224260426869.html Irish Times: Pay cuts make up bulk of Gardai saving (10th December 2009)] Reports 4 million euros allocated to a new DNA database.
** [http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/1210/justice.html RTE: Bill next week on DNA database (10th December 2009)]

==Detailed analysis==
CRG analysis of a previous version of the Bill (from 2010)

'''I. Law on Point'''

Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence and DNA Database System) Bill of 2010<ref name="ftn2"> Key definitions in subsection (1) include: ‘‘EFÉ’’, ‘‘DNA profile’’, ‘‘intimate sample’’, ‘‘non-intimate sample’’, ‘‘match’’, ‘‘protected person’’.

‘‘EFÉ’’ refers to Eolaíocht Fhóiréinseach Éireann — the new name for the Forensic Science Laboratory of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

‘‘DNA profile’’ in relation to a person is confined to information derived from the non-coding part of DNA which refers to the chromosome regions of a person’s DNA that are not known to provide any functional properties of the person.

‘‘intimate sample’’ refers to: a sample of blood, pubic hair or urine; a swab from a genital region or a body orifice (other than the mouth), or a dental impression.

‘‘non-intimate sample’’ refers to: a sample of saliva, hair other than pubic hair or a nail or any material found under the nail; a swab from any part of the body including the mouth but not from any other body orifice or a genital region; or a skin impression (such as a foot print). Subsection (4) provides that references to the mouth are to be interpreted as including references to the inside of the mouth.

‘‘match’’ refers to the relationship between two DNA profiles and ‘‘means that there is such a degree of correspondence between them that they are indistinguishable and it is probable that they relate to the same person, and the degree of probability can be indicated statistically.’’

‘‘protected person’’ refers to a person (including a child) who by reason of a mental or physical disability lacks the capacity to understand the general nature and effect of the taking of a sample from him or her, or to indicate (by speech, sign language or any other means of communication) whether he or she consents to a sample being taken from him or her. Subsection (2) excludes intoxication whether by alcohol, drugs or other substances from the meaning of ‘‘mental or physical disability’’. Subsection (7) provides that the fact that a person is regarded as a protected person for the purposes of the Bill does not have any bearing on whether he or she lacks capacity for other purposes.

</ref>

'''II. Entry Criteria'''

''Section 56 ''provides that EFÉ shall establish the DNA Database System as soon as may be after commencement of this section. The System shall comprise 2 divisions: the investigation division and the identification division. The investigation division is to contain the following indexes of DNA profiles: the crime scene index, the reference index and the elimination indexes. The identification division is to contain one index of DNA profiles, the missing and unknown persons index. Each index is also to contain information that may be used to identify the sample from which each profile was generated.

''Section 57 ''restricts the purposes for which the System may be used to the investigation of criminal offences and the finding or identification of missing persons, the identification of seriously ill, or severely injured, persons who are unable to indicate their identity or the identification of the bodies of unknown deceased persons. Subsection (2) is illustrative of these purposes.

''Section 58 ''provides that the crime scene index shall contain DNA profiles generated from samples of biological material found at, or recovered from, crime scenes. Crime scene samples predating the commencement of the Bill are included. Crime scene is defined for the purposes of the Bill.

''Section 59 ''provides that the reference index shall contain DNA profiles generated from samples taken from persons under sections 11, 12, and 13 (i.e. from person in Garda custody), section 27 (in accordance with 27(7) to (9) — certain volunteers who specifically consent to the entry of their profiles in the System) and 30, 31, 33, (offenders and former offenders) and 34 (deceased suspects).

''Section 60 ''provides that the elimination (Garda Síochána) index shall contain DNA profiles generated from samples taken under sections 39 (from certain Garda personnel).

''Section 61 ''provides that the elimination (crime scene investigators) index shall contain DNA profiles generated from samples taken under sections 40 (from certain Garda personnel), 41 (staff members of EFÉ) and 42 (certain prescribed persons).

''Section 62 ''provides that the elimination (prescribed persons) index shall contain DNA profiles generated from samples taken under section 42 (from certain prescribed persons).

''Section 63 ''provides that the missing and unknown persons index shall contain profiles generated from samples taken under sections 46 (missing persons), 47 (seriously ill or severely injured persons) and 48 (unknown deceased persons).

Section 64 provides that EFÉ shall establish and operate the DNA Database System in accordance with the Bill. Subsection (2) is illustrative of the functions that EFÉ will be required to perform in relation to the System. Subsection (3) provides that the Director of EFÉ may make arrangements with other laboratories to perform one of its functions in relation to the DNA Database System — the generation of DNA profiles from samples taken under the Bill. Any such arrangements must be in compliance with the requirements of the Bill.

''Section 65 ''specifies the rules in accordance with which a DNA profile entered in an index may be compared with another profile in that index or with a DNA profile in another index. The only purpose for which a profile may be compared with another profile other than in accordance with the specified rules is for the purpose of the administration of the System. In all cases a profile entered in an index may be compared with other profiles in the same index. As regards comparisons between profiles entered in different indexes: a profile in the crime scene index may be compared with a profile in the reference index and with profiles in the elimination indexes under certain conditions; a profile in the reference index may be compared with a profile in the crime scene index or in the missing and unknown persons index; a profile entered in the missing and unknown persons index may be compared with a profile in the reference index or the crime scene index but only for the purposes of identification. Searches of the System may only be conducted by a staff member of EFÉ. Profiles entered in the System may not be compared with profiles that are not entered in the System except in accordance with sections 96 and 97 which concern international cooperation.

'''III. Sample Collection'''

Taking of bodily samples from persons in custody of Garda Síochána

''Section 9 ''provides that a sample or samples may be taken from a person who is detained under any of the existing Garda Síochána detention powers: section 30 of the Offences Against the State Act 1939, section 4 of the Criminal Justice Act 1984, section 2 of the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act 1996, and section 50 of the Criminal Justice Act 2007. Samples may also be taken where a person is detained under any of these powers on the basis of a rearrest warrant issued under section 30A of the 1939 Act, section 10 of the 1984 Act, section 4 of the 1996 Act and section 51 of the 2007 Act. Linking the power to take samples with the detention powers means that in general the offence threshold for the taking of a sample is a maximum sentence of imprisonment of 5 years or more subject to limited exceptions in the case of the Offences Against the State Act 1939 and the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act 1996 which contain a small number of offences which do not meet the 5 year threshold.

A sample or samples may be taken from a person in prison who is arrested by the Garda Síochána under section 42 of the Criminal Justice Act 1999 for the purposes of the investigation of an offence other than the offence in respect of which he or she is in prison and who is detained pursuant to section 4 of the 1984 Act.

The three categories of samples that may be taken are specified: a sample under section 11 of the Bill i.e. a sample for the purpose of the generation of a DNA profile in respect of the person for entry in the DNA Database System which is to be established under section 56 and intimate and non-intimate samples under sections 12 and 13 for the purpose of proving or disproving the involvement of the person in the offence in respect of which he or she is detained i.e. for evidential purposes.

''Section 10 ''provides that it is the responsibility of the member in charge of the Garda station in which a person is detained under any of the Garda detention powers listed in section 9(''a'') through (''d'') to determine whether that person is a protected person. This determination is required because Part 2 of the Bill provides additional safeguards in respect of detained persons who are protected persons. ‘‘Member in charge’’ is defined in section 2 and refers to the member in charge appointed under the Criminal Justice Act 1984 (Treatment in Custody) Regulations 1987. In the event that the taking of an intimate sample is authorised under section 12 the opinion of the member in charge that the person is a protected person must be certified by a medical practitioner.

''Section 11 ''permits a member of the Garda Síochána to take a sample from a detained person for the purpose of generating a DNA profile for entry in the reference index of the DNA Database System— the sample is not taken for evidential purposes. A member not below the rank of sergeant must authorise the taking of the sample. Notwithstanding that the consent of the person to the taking of the sample is not required the person is to be informed of various matters before the sample is taken, including (where applicable) that reasonable force may be used in the event that he or she fails or refuses to allow the sample to be taken. Protected persons and children under 14 years of age are excluded from the application of this section. The Minister, by order, shall exclude certain offences from the scope of this section because their nature is such that evidence relating to DNA would not assist with their investigation or prosecution. As regards the application of this section to children who are 14 years or older the Minister is required to review this within 7 years of the commencement of the section and may, having regard to the outcome of the review, vary the application of the section to such children.

''Section 12 ''concerns the taking of an intimate sample from a detained person for the purposes of the investigation of the offence in respect of which the person is detained and for evidential purposes in any proceedings. If the sample taken is one which may be used to generate a DNA profile in respect of the person then the sample may also be used for the purpose of the DNA Database System. A sample of this type may only be taken if a member of the Garda Síochána not below the rank of inspector has authorised it and the appropriate written consent has been given by the detained person concerned. Before giving the necessary authorisation the member must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for suspecting the involvement of the person in the offence in respect of which the person concerned is detained and for believing that the sample will tend to confirm or disprove the involvement of the person in the offence. Before the detained person is requested to consent he or she must be informed of various matters including the consequences of not consenting which are detailed in section 19.

''Section 13 ''concerns the taking of a non-intimate sample from a detained person for the purposes of the investigation of the offence in respect of which the person is detained and for evidential purposes in any proceedings. If the sample taken is one which may be used to generate a DNA profile in respect of the person then the sample may also be used for the purpose of the DNA Database System. A sample of this type may only be taken if a member of the Garda Síochána not below the rank of inspector has authorised it. Unlike in the case of intimate samples under section 12 the consent of the person concerned is not required. Before giving the necessary authorisation the member must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for suspecting the involvement of the person in the offence in respect of which the person concerned is detained and for believing that the sample will tend to confirm or disprove the involvement of that person in the offence. Notwithstanding that the person’s consent is not required he or she is to be informed of various matters before the sample is taken including that reasonable force may be used in the event that he or she fails or refuses to allow the sample to be taken. Non-intimate samples are taken or caused to be taken by a member of the Garda Síochána.

''Section 15 ''defines the meaning of the ‘‘appropriate consent’’ which is required under section 12 before an intimate sample may be taken. In the case of an adult (i.e. a person aged 18 years or older other than a protected person) his or her consent is required. In the case of a protected person the consent of his or her parent or guardian or an order from a District Court judge under section 16 is required. In the case of a child aged 14 or older, the consent of the child and either a parent or guardian or an order from a District Court judge under section 17 is required. In the case of a child who is below the age of 14 the consent of his or her parent or guardian or an order from a District Court judge under section 17 is required. A parent or guardian may be excluded from giving consent in certain circumstances; namely where he or she is the victim of the offence, has been arrested in respect of the offence or the member in charge has reasonable grounds for suspecting that the parent or guardian is complicit in the offence concerned or is likely to obstruct the course of justice. The exclusion of one parent or guardian on one of these grounds does not prevent another parent or guardian from being asked to give consent. Before consent is sought from a parent or guardian he or she must be given the information that is required to be given to the detained person under section 12.

''Sections 16 ''and ''17 ''concern protected persons and children respectively and provide that in certain circumstances a member of the Garda Síochána not below the rank of inspector may apply to a District Court judge for an order to take an intimate sample from a protected person or child. The circumstances in which such an application may be made are where a parent or guardian: cannot be contacted despite reasonable efforts; has been contacted but indicates that he or she cannot or will not attend at the Garda station within a reasonable period of time; is excluded from giving consent under section 15; refuses to give consent in the case of a protected person or in the case of child where the child’s consent is not required (those under 14 years), or where the consent of the child is required (those aged 14 years or older) where the child has consented; or the protected person or child does not have, or it cannot be ascertained, within a reasonable period of time that he or she has a living parent or guardian from whom consent may be sought.

''Section 19 ''concerns the consequences that may follow a refusal to consent to the taking of an intimate sample. A refusal to consent without reasonable cause may give rise to an adverse inference being drawn in subsequent criminal proceedings. Such an adverse inference may be treated as corroborating any evidence to which it is relevant — it may not be the sole or main basis of a conviction. The adverse inference may not be drawn if certain steps have not been followed. The steps are that the person was told in ordinary language that a failure to consent could give rise to such an inference being drawn, that he or he was given a reasonable opportunity to consult a solicitor before refusing consent and that the request for consent was video-recorded or the person consented in writing to it not being so recorded. This section does not apply to: a protected person, a child who is under 14 years, or a child who is 14 years or older who gave the necessary consent but whose parent or guardian refused consent unless the child refuses to comply with a District Court order under section 17 authorising the taking of the sample.

''Section 20 ''concerns the circumstances in which a sample taken for the purposes of the DNA Database System under section 11 may be treated as a non-intimate sample taken under section 13 for evidential purposes. This may occur where during the same period of detention a sample has been taken under section 11 and a decision is subsequently made that a non-intimate sample under section 13 is required for the purposes of the investigation at hand i.e. to prove or disprove the person’s involvement in the offence in connection with which he or she is detained. Before a section 11 sample may be treated as a section 13 sample similar procedures that apply to the taking of a section 13 sample must be followed — a member not below the rank of inspector must authorise the change of use of the sample and the person must be informed of certain matters including that the result of forensic tests on the sample may be used in evidence.

''Section 24 ''sets out the circumstances in which a section 11 or section 13 sample may be taken with the use of reasonable force. The use of force is not permitted to take section 11 samples from children or section 13 samples from children under 12 years. Force does not apply in the case of samples taken under section 12 i.e. intimate samples. Reasonable force must be authorised by a member of the Garda Síochána not below the rank of superintendent. The detained person must be informed in advance of the intention to use reasonable force and that the necessary authorisation has been given. The use of reasonable force must be observed by a member not below the rank of inspector who is to determine the number of members necessary. The taking of a sample with the use of reasonable force must be video-recorded. Special provisions apply in case of protected persons and children (where section 13 samples are required) — a person other than a member of the Garda Síochána must be present when force is being used to take a sample unless the protected person or child indicates that he or she does not wish to have the person present. The person may be the parent/guardian or adult relative or other adult reasonably named by the person who attends at the Garda or in their absence or exclusion under section 21 or 22 another adult nominated by the member in charge.

Taking of samples from volunteers to generate DNA profiles

''Section 27 ''provides that a member of the Garda Síochána or an authorised person may request a person i.e. a volunteer to have a sample taken for the purpose of generating a DNA profile in respect of him or her in relation to the investigation of a particular offence or an incident that may involve the commission of an offence. This section does not apply to persons in the custody of the Garda Síochána or offenders who may be sampled under section 30 or 31. An authorised person refers to a person appointed in writing under section 104 by a member not below the rank of superintendent for the purposes of sections 39 and 40 and Parts 3 and 6. In the event that the DNA profile of a victim or a person reasonably considered to be a victim is required in relation to the investigation of an offence or incident this section applies i.e. he or she is to be treated as a volunteer. Before seeking the consent of a volunteer to the taking of a sample the member or authorised person must inform the volunteer of certain matters including that he or she is not obliged to provide the sample. The volunteer’s consent must be in writing.

In general profiles generated from samples taken from volunteers will not be entered in the DNA Database System — they will be retained for use in connection with the particular offence/incident only. Subsections (7) to (9) provide an exception to this general rule. A member not below the rank of sergeant may at the time that a sample is being taken under this section from a volunteer (or afterwards), inform the volunteer (other than a protected person, a child, or a victim or a person reasonably considered to be a victim) that he or she may consent to the entry of his or her profile in the reference index of the DNA Database System. This consent is a separate consent to the consent required to the taking of the sample in relation to a particular investigation or incident but must also be in writing. The person must be informed of certain matters before his or her profile may be entered in the reference index including that he or she is not obliged to consent to its entry, the effect of such entry and the rules governing the destruction of the sample and the removal of the profile from the System.

''Section 28 ''sets out the circumstances in which a mass screening of a class of persons defined by certain characteristics may be conducted. It provides that a mass screening must be authorised by a member not below the rank of chief superintendent. In order to authorise a mass screening the member must have reasonable grounds for believing that the mass screening of the target class is likely to further the investigation of the offence and is a reasonable and proportionate measure to be taken in the investigation of that offence. A mass screening may only be conducted in respect of a relevant offence which is defined in section 2(1) as an offence in respect of which a person may be detained under any of the Garda detention powers listed in section 9(''a'')to(''d'') — generally offences which attract a maximum sentence of 5 years or more. The target class may be determined by sex, age, kinship, geographic area, time, or any other matter which the authorising member considers appropriate. A person who comes within the target class is a volunteer and therefore is not obliged to accede to a request to provide a sample. His or her written consent is required. As is the case with all volunteers, he or she must be informed of certain matters before his or her consent is sought. A sample taken as part of a mass screening may not be used for the purposes of the DNA Database System — it is tested and retained for the purposes of the investigation of the relevant offence in respect of which it was taken.

Taking of samples from other persons or bodies for reference index of DNA Database System

''Section 30 ''concerns adult offenders. It provides that a sample may be taken for the purpose of generating a DNA profile in respect of the person for entry in the reference index of the DNA Database System from offenders who: on commencement of the section are still subject to sentence in connection with a relevant offence, are sentenced after commencement (whether convicted before or after commencement) in respect of a relevant offence, are serving sentences of imprisonment in the State following transfer (whether before or after commencement of the section) under the Transfer of Sentenced Persons Act 1995 or the Transfer of Execution of Sentences Act 2005 in respect of an offence that corresponds to a relevant offence, and persons who (on or after commencement of the section) are subject to the notification requirements of Part 2 of the Sex Offenders Act 2001.

The sample is to be taken as soon as practicable after a person comes within one of the eligible categories and in any event before expiry of the sentence or the notification requirements. Where the offender is in prison the sample will be taken by a prison officer following authorisation by the prison governor (who may delegate his/her powers under section 107). Where the offender is not in prison the sample may be taken by a member of the Garda Síochána where an authorisation to do so has been given by a member not below the rank of sergeant and the offender attends at a station for that purpose pursuant to ‘‘a notice to attend’’ issued by a member not below the rank of inspector. Non-compliance with the notice to attend without reasonable cause may result in the offender being prosecuted summarily. The section specifies the information that is to be given to the offender by the prison officer or the member, as the case may be, before the sample is taken.

''Section 31 ''concerns child offenders. For the purposes of this section ‘‘child’’ is not limited to persons under 18 years of age — a wider definition is required having regard to section 155(2) of the Children Act 2001 which allows certain offenders detained in children detention schools to remain for a period up to six months after attaining the age of 18 years. The section provides that a sample may be taken for the purpose of generating a DNA profile in respect of a child offender for entry in the reference index of the DNA Database System from children who: on commencement of the section are still subject to sentence in connection with a relevant offence, are sentenced to detention after commencement (whether convicted before or after commencement) in respect of a relevant offence, are serving sentences of detention in the State following transfer (whether before or after commencement of the section) under the Transfer of Sentenced Persons Act 1995 or the Transfer of Execution of Sentences Act 2005 in respect of an offence that corresponds to a relevant offence, and child offenders who (on or after commencement of the section) are subject to the notification requirements of Part 2 of the Sex Offenders Act 2001.

''Section 32 ''contains the criteria that must be met before a person comes within the term ‘‘former offender’’. A former offender is a person who is no longer subject to a sentence for a relevant offence (or a corresponding offence in the case of convictions in other jurisdictions) or in the case of a sex offender, is no longer subject to notification requirements under the Sex Offenders Act 2001 (or corresponding requirements in the case of convictions in other jurisdictions). A person is not a former offender for the purpose of this section: if his /her DNA profile is already entered in the reference index of the DNA Database (in so far as that can be ascertained) and a member of the Garda Síochána or a judge of the District Court is not satisfied having regard to a range of specified factors that it is appropriate that a sample be taken under section 33; the person concerned is not ordinarily resident in the State or does not have his or her principal residence in the State; and a period of 10 years has elapsed since the expiry of the last sentence for a relevant offence of which the person was convicted or, in the case of a sex offender, since the end of the last notification period to which he or she was subject. Only certain convictions handed down when the person was a child are eligible for consideration — those triable by the Central Criminal Court and any other offences prescribed having regard to their nature and seriousness.

''Section 33 ''sets out the procedures to apply in the case of former offenders. Where a member not below the rank of superintendent is satisfied that a person is a former offender and that it is in the interests of the protection of society and desirable for the purpose of assisting in the investigation of offences to have a sample taken from the person under this section the member may authorise the taking of the sample. Where such an authorisation has been given a member may request the former offender concerned to attend at the station for the purpose of having the sample taken. The person shall be put on notice that if he or she does not attend an ''ex parte ''application may be made to a District Court judge for an order authorising the sending of a notice to attend — failure to comply with which without reasonable cause is a summary offence. Should an application to a District Court judge be necessary it must be made by a member not below the rank of superintendent. In the event that the person is prosecuted for not complying with the court order it shall be a defence for him or her to show that he or she is not a former offender. Before a sample is taken under this section the former offender must be given certain information.

''Section 34 ''allows a sample to be taken from the body of a deceased person for the purpose of generating a DNA profile in respect of the person to be entered in the reference index of the DNA Database System. The taking of such a sample must be authorised by a District Court judge on the application of a member not below the rank of superintendent. An application may be made where the member has reasonable grounds for suspecting that the person, prior to his or her death, has committed a relevant offence and that the taking of a sample will further the investigation of the offence concerned. The judge may make further orders in relation to entry, search and seizure on the application of the member in order to allow the order to take the sample to be executed. Samples under this section are to be taken by registered medical practitioners or any other prescribed persons. A profile entered in the reference index of the System in accordance with this section may be compared with the other profiles in that index and with the profiles contained in the crime scene index of the System in accordance with section 65(3). Once this exercise has been completed the profile is to be removed from the System and the sample destroyed unless the member in charge of the investigation of the offence concerned is satisfied that the sample and profile should be retained for the purposes of that investigation. This section does not authorise the exhumation of a body.

''Section 35 ''sets out the circumstances in which reasonable force may be used to take samples under Part 4. Reasonable force may only be used to take samples under this Part where the person concerned is in prison, a children detention school or other place of detention. Reasonable force must be authorised by the governor of the prison/place of detention or the director of the children detention school. The person must be informed in advance of the intention to use reasonable force and that the necessary authorisation has been given. The use of reasonable force must be observed by the governor/director of the children detention school who is to determine the number of prison officers/staff of the children detention school that is reasonably necessary for the purposes of the section. The taking of a sample with the use of reasonable force must be video-recorded.

Taking of samples from persons or bodies for purposes of identification division of DNA Database System

''Section 46 ''concerns missing persons, whether they went missing before or after commencement. It provides that a sample may be taken in relation to such a person from his or her clothing or other belongings or from his or her blood relatives for the purposes of the missing and unknown persons index of the DNA Database System. A sample may only be taken for the purposes of the Garda investigation of the disappearance of the person if the circumstances of the disappearance so require or following a natural or other disaster, one or more persons are missing. Authorisation is required at inspector level or above for the taking of the sample. The authorisation may only be given if the member giving it believes that the taking of the sample and the entry of the related DNA profile in the missing and unknown persons index of the DNA Database System may assist with finding or identifying the missing person. Before a sample may be taken from a blood relative his or her consent must be obtained in writing. Such a person is to be given certain information before the sample is taken. A sample, in the case of a blood relative, is restricted to a mouth swab or plucked head hairs (as set out in section 2(3)). A sample relating to a missing person that is in the possession of the Garda Síochána or EFÉ arising from the investigation into the disappearance of the person may be used for the purposes of this section.

''Section 47 ''concerns persons who are seriously ill or severely injured and who, by reason of that illness or injury, cannot identify themselves. It provides that a sample (restricted to a mouth swab or plucked head hair) may be taken from such a person for the purposes of the missing and unknown persons index of the DNA Database System on the authorisation of the High Court. A court application may only be made where: a medical practitioner certifies that the person concerned is suffering from a serious illness or has sustained a severe injury by reason of which he or she is unable to identify him or herself and that inability is likely to endure for a prolonged period; and the person concerned (other than a child or a protected person) has been consulted with regard to the making of the application in so far as that is possible. A court application may be made by the Health Services Executive, the owner or manager of a hospital or nursing home or the Garda Commissioner. The matters of which the High Court has to be satisfied before making an order are specified. A sample taken under this section must be taken by a medical practitioner/nurse or any other prescribed person.

''Section 48 ''concerns unknown deceased persons. It provides that a coroner to whom the death of the unknown deceased person is reportable may authorise the taking of a sample from the body of the person for the purposes of the missing and unknown persons index of the DNA Database System where he or she has reason to believe that such a course of action may assist with identifying the person. The coroner is to inform the superintendent of the Garda district in which the unknown deceased person was located of the giving of the authorisation. A sample taken under this section must be taken by a medical practitioner or any other prescribed person. A sample taken from the body of the unknown deceased person already in the possession of the coroner may be used for the purposes of this section.

'''Removal Criteria and Sample Retention '''

''Section 72 ''defines who constitutes an applicant for the purposes of section 74 (i.e. who may apply to the Commissioner for the destruction of his or her sample and removal of a profile (if any) from the System. Subject to certain qualifications an applicant is a person who: was not proceeded against, or if proceeded against was acquitted or the proceedings were dismissed or discontinued; who is subject to an order under section 1 of the Probation of Offenders Act 1907; or whose conviction was quashed or declared to be a miscarriage of justice. In the case of a person who was not proceeded against a period of 12 months must elapse between the taking of the sample concerned and the application. Furthermore the failure to institute proceedings must not be due to the fact that the person absconded or could not be located.

''Section 73 ''provides that in exceptional circumstances a person against whom proceedings have not been brought does not have to wait for the usual period of 12 months to elapse before making an application under section 74 to the Commissioner. Subsection (2) is illustrative of what constitutes exceptional circumstances.

''Section 74 ''provides that an applicant (within the meaning of section 72) may apply in writing to the Commissioner to have his or her sample destroyed and any profile removed from the System. The Commissioner must determine the application within 12 weeks and provide written reasons. In determining the application the Commissioner must be satisfied that the person is ‘‘an applicant’’ and have regard, in particular to a range of specified matters. The Commissioner may grant the application in full or in part. Where the Commissioner does not grant the application in full or does not make a determination within the 12 weeks the applicant may appeal to the District Court. The appeal is to be on notice and shall be heard in private.

''Section 75 ''concerns former offenders. It provides that a person from whom a sample was taken under section 33 may apply to the Commissioner for the destruction of that sample/removal of that profile in the event that any conviction to which regard was had when making a determination as to whether he or she was a former offender under section 32 has been quashed or declared to be a miscarriage of justice.

''Section 76, ''subject to certain qualifications, applies a default destruction period of 3 years to samples taken under section 11, 30, 31, or 33 i.e. samples taken under Parts 2 and 4 for the purposes of the DNA Database System.

''Section 77 ''subject to certain qualifications, applies a default destruction period of 3 years to samples taken under sections 12 and 13 (intimate and non-intimate samples for evidential purposes). The circumstances in which this section applies include where the person was not proceeded against within the default destruction period, or if proceeded against was acquitted or the proceedings were dismissed or discontinued or who is subject to an order under section 1 of the Probation of Offenders Act 1907.

''Section 78 ''subject to certain qualifications, applies default removal periods of 10 years for adults and 5 years for children and protected persons in the case of DNA profiles entered in the System. The circumstances in which this section applies include where the person was not proceeded against within the relevant default removal period, or if proceeded against was acquitted or the proceedings were dismissed or discontinued or who is subject to an order under section 1 of the Probation of Offenders Act 1907.

''Section 79 ''makes an exception to the indefinite retention arrangements applicable to the DNA profiles of convicted persons entered in the System. The exception applies in the case of child offenders (other than those convicted of offences triable by the Central Criminal Court or prescribed by the Minister having regard to their nature and seriousness). A default removal period of 10 years applies subject to certain qualifications such as the child offender not being convicted of an offence within the default period.

''Section 80 ''specifies the circumstances in which a person who would otherwise come within the meaning of ‘‘applicant’’ in section 72 is excluded and in which the default removal periods in sections 78 and 79 do not apply. The circumstances are: the fact that the person was not proceeded against for an offence other than the offence in connection with which the sample was taken was due to the fact that he or she absconded or could not be located; proceedings for another offence have been instituted against the person and he or she has not been acquitted or the proceedings have not been dismissed or discontinued; the person has been convicted of another offence and that conviction has not been quashed or declared to be a miscarriage of justice.

''Section 81 ''deals with the application of the time periods under section 72 and 78 where an opportunity to take a sample from a person arose during the relevant period but was not taken (e.g. where the person was arrested and detained but a sample was not taken because his or her profile was already on the System). Where this is the case the date on which the subsequent sample could have been taken is deemed to be the date on which the first sample was taken i.e. the clock is re-started.

''Section 82 ''concerns the destruction/removal arrangements for Part 3 (volunteers). A volunteer (or in the case of a child or protected person the person who gave consent) may request the destruction of his or her sample and any profile by notice in writing to the Commissioner. Pursuant to the request the sample/profile is to be destroyed within 2 months subject to section 88. If a sample/profile has not been destroyed previously it is to be destroyed within 2 months of the completion of the investigation or any proceedings in connection with the offence in respect of which it was taken. Where a volunteer consented to the entry of his or her profile in the DNA Database System a request for destruction is to be construed as including a request for removal. In such a case the Commissioner may request the volunteer to agree to his or her profile being removed from the System but retained in connection with the particular investigation in respect of which it was taken. The written consent of the volunteer is required to such a request.

''Section 86 ''sets out the destruction arrangements to apply to a sample taken under section 43 or 44. In general once the necessary comparison between the profile generated from the sample taken under either of those sections with the crime scene sample concerned has been completed the sample and profile are to be destroyed as soon as practicable. An exception may be made where the Commissioner, or the Director, as the case may be, is satisfied that there is good reason relating to the investigation of a particular offence why the sample/profile should be retained. If such is the case the sample/profile is to be destroyed not more than 2 months after the completion of the investigation or any proceedings, which ever is the later.

''Section 87 ''concerns the destruction of samples/profiles relating to Part 6 (identification). A blood relative of a missing person (or in the case of a child or protected person the person who gave consent) may request the destruction of his or her sample and the removal of the profile by notice in writing to the Commissioner. Pursuant to the request the sample/profile is to be destroyed within 2 months. A sample/profile taken from a blood relative (if not previously destroyed) or relating to the missing person is to be destroyed and the profile removed within 2 months of the missing person having been located or identified. Similar arrangements apply in the case of samples taken from unknown persons (living or deceased). Certain qualifications apply in all cases. The section does not authorise the destruction of a sample or the removal of a profile where it is required for the purposes of: an investigation into the disappearance of a missing person or into how the unknown living person became ill or was injured or the unknown deceased person died; or an inquest.

''Section 88 ''provides that the Commissioner may apply to a District Court judge to retain a sample beyond the default destruction periods or a profile beyond the default removal periods (in sections 76, 77, 78 or 79) where there is good reason to do so. A member not below the rank of superintendent may make an application to a District Court judge to retain a sample/profile taken from a volunteer under section 27 or 28 where there is good reason relating to the investigation of the particular offence in respect of which it was taken.

An application is to be on notice. The hearing is to be in private. An order may not be made unless the person concerned, where he or she applies to be heard, has been given a reasonable opportunity to be heard.

''Section 91 ''provides that the Minister may by order alter (in the main by deceasing) the default destruction periods and default removal periods specified in this Part having regard to a review conducted under section 90. ''Section 92 ''provides that where a sample is to be destroyed or a profile is to be removed the Commissioner shall request or cause to be requested EFÉ to carry out the necessary actions. ''Section 93 ''specifies the circumstances in which a person is to be notified of the destruction of a sample or the removal of a profile from the System. ''Section 94 ''provides that the references in this Part to the Commissioner, for the purposes of the application of this Part, shall be construed as references to the Ombudsman Commission.

----
<references/>