This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk/6104876.stm

The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Public consulted on DNA database Fear that DNA use 'gone too far'
(about 2 hours later)
Members of the public are to be asked whether it is right for the national DNA database to store details of people not convicted of a crime. The UK's DNA database may have grown so far beyond what it was intended to do it risks undermining civil rights, one of its pioneers has told the BBC.
The UK now has the world's largest database of DNA samples - 3.6 million. Prof Alec Jeffreys said hundreds of thousands of innocent people's DNA was now held - with a disproportionate number from young black men.
The Nuffield Council on Bioethics will seek public views on whether police should continue to be allowed to keep DNA samples from all those arrested. The UK holds 3.6m DNA samples - the world's biggest database.
DNA fingerprinting inventor Prof Alec Jeffreys has told the BBC that the use of his invention may have gone too far. A public consultation is to ask whether samples should continue to be held, if an arrested person is later released.
Prime Minister Tony Blair recently said the maximum number of people should be included on the database. 'Mission creep'
Civil liberties groups have said that it is unfair that innocent people are included on the database, often having been arrested and then eliminated from an investigation. DNA fingerprinting inventor Prof Jeffreys told BBC Radio Four's Today programme: "The real concern I have in the UK is what I see as a sort of 'mission creep'.
Fighting crime "When the DNA database was initially established, it was to database DNA from criminals so if they re-offended, they could be picked up.
Prof Jeffreys said there was an increasing danger of "mission creep", as samples were taken for one purpose could be used for different purposes in the future. "Now hundreds of thousands of entirely innocent people are now populating that database, people who have come to the police's attention, for example by being charged with a crime and subsequently released."
But officials and victims' support groups have noted that only people who have committed crimes have anything to fear. The power of detecting these offences as far as the victims are concerned should never be underestimated Chief Constable Tony Lake
"We want to hear the public's views on whether storing the DNA profiles of victims and suspects who are later not charged, or acquitted, is justified by the need to fight crime," said Professor Bob Hepple QC, chairman of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics. He said the samples were "skewed socio-economically and ethnically", adding: "My view is that that is discriminatory."
"Certain groups such as young males and ethnic minorities are over-represented on the database, and the council will be asking whether this potential for bias in law enforcement is acceptable." And he was concerned that samples taken for one purpose could be used for different purposes in the future.
But the council will look at whether it would be fairer to include every citizen on the database - something that the government has stopped short of proposing so far. Last week prime minister Tony Blair revealed he had given his own DNA sample voluntarily in 1999 and said the maximum number of samples possible should be held on the database.
Scotland difference 'Shoe rapist'
Police now get more than 3,500 DNA matches a month. In 2005/6 they got matches for 45,000 crimes, including 422 murders and 645 rapes.
"Shoe rapist" James Lloyd of South Yorkshire, convicted in July of a string of sex attacks in the 1980s, was solved through "familial" DNA - where a sample from a family member leads to the criminal.
Lincolnshire Chief Constable Tony Lake said he understood concerns, but told the BBC: "My real concern is that we have a database where we don't maximise the advantages as far as the public are concerned.
The prime minister is a strong supporter of DNA technology
"The power of detecting these offences as far as the victims are concerned should never be underestimated."
He said it was not true that witnesses and victims automatically had their DNA put on the database, they had to volunteer first.
But once consent is given, it cannot be withdrawn, unlike in Scotland. Mr Lake said he agreed this should be a matter for debate.
The Nuffield Council on Bioethics is to seek views on whether samples should be kept from all people arrested, even if they are never convicted with a crime.
Chairman Professor Bob Hepple QC, said they would ask whether the fact that most DNA samples were from young men or ethnic minorities meant there was a "potential for bias" in law enforcement.
It will also look at whether it would be fairer to include everyone on the database - something that the government has stopped short of proposing so far.
Prof Hepple said the central issue was whether the UK would "become instead of a nation of citizens, a nation of suspects".Prof Hepple said the central issue was whether the UK would "become instead of a nation of citizens, a nation of suspects".
In Scotland, those not convicted of a crime can have their DNA samples removed from the database. But Anna Fairclough, of human rights group Liberty, said: "Less than half a percent of recorded crime in the UK is the result of using DNA.
The consultation scheme will also look at the "voluntary" taking of samples from witnesses and victims. Having given consent, it cannot be withdrawn. "It is not the case that if everybody was on the database that would mean all crime could be solved."
The way DNA is being used to solve crimes is changing, with increased sophistication leading to many more "cold cases" being reopened. DNA fingerprinting is also being used in volume crime like burglary and car theft to great effect.
Members of the public will be asked whether the database should be used for other purposes, such as studies by scientists.
With submissions from the public and interested groups being taken until 30 January, a discussion paper will follow next autumn.