1 / 17

DNA and the ECHR: rights, rules and technicalities

DNA and the ECHR: rights, rules and technicalities. Liz Heffernan Trinity College Dublin. Nuances of Legal Analysis. Results and reasoning Majority and individual judgments Concurrences and dissents Details, caveats and provisos Precedents, ratio decidendi and obiter dicta .

maida
Download Presentation

DNA and the ECHR: rights, rules and technicalities

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. DNA and the ECHR: rights, rules and technicalities Liz Heffernan Trinity College Dublin

  2. Nuances of Legal Analysis Results and reasoning Majority and individual judgments Concurrences and dissents Details, caveats and provisos Precedents, ratio decidendi and obiter dicta

  3. S and Marper v UK ECtHR held that the practice in England and Wales of indefinitely retaining the fingerprints, cellular samples and DNA profiles of persons suspected but not convicted of criminal offences violates Article 8 ECHR

  4. Grand Chamber ECtHR Robust nature of protection afforded to informational privacy Consensus among 17 judges

  5. ECHR Article 8 – privacy Article 14 – non discrimination Article 6 – fair trial

  6. Article 8 ECHR Everyone has the right to respect for his private … life … There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety … for the prevention of disorder or crime or for the protection of the rights of others.

  7. 4 lines of enquiry Has there been an interference? Was the interference in accordance with law? Did the interference pursue a legitimate aim? Was the interference necessary in a democratic society?

  8. Personal Information Cellular samples DNA profiles Fingerprints Other forms of data EU data protection regime Concept of privacy

  9. Government Actions Retention Use Automated processing

  10. Necessary in a democratic society Onus on respondent state to provide relevant and sufficient evidence that practice is proportionate to a pressing social need Margin of appreciation European practice and level of consensus

  11. Proportionality • Blanket, indiscriminate, open-ended nature of power of retention • Nature or gravity of offence • Age of offender • Indefinite retention – no time limit • Failed to strike a fair balance between the competing public and private interests

  12. Safeguards: Remedial Regime • Only limited possibilities to have data removed and materials destroyed • No independent review of justification for retention according to defined criteria • E.g. Seriousness of offence • E.g. Previous arrests and strength of suspicion • E.g. Other special circumstances

  13. Other UK arguments Technological leader Practical benefit to policing – empirical evidence

  14. Implications • Revision in law, practice and judicial thinking • Onus on national authorities to comply and to monitor compliance • Reflection on our conceptualisation of informational privacy • Types of data • Nature of activities and purposes • Governance of databasing

  15. Limits of Judgment Taking of material and data for investigative purposes Retention while persons remain suspects Limited retention of data of former suspects in exceptional circumstances

  16. Law Legislative drafting Rights Rules Technicalities

  17. Ireland Implications of S & Marper for retention of fingerprints and for retention of DNA material under existing regime and proposed DNA database People (DPP) v Boyce [2008] IESC 62

More Related