DNA Ruling - Unanimous Judgment Against Britain

Two British men have won their case in the European Court of Human Rights, as all 17 judges unanimously ruled, that they should not have had their DNA and fingerprints retained by South Yorkshire police, neither having been convicted of any offence. The judges said keeping the information "could not be regarded as necessary in a democratic society". They ruled that the police actions had violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the right to respect for private and family life and awarded both men £36,400 (42,000 Euros) in costs, less the money already paid in legal aid. The case was brought by Michael Marper (45) and another man, a teenager identified as "S", as the police refused to destroy their fingerprints and DNA, despite no case or conviction against them.

The judges ruled the retention of the men's DNA "failed to strike a fair balance between the competing public and private interests," and that the UK government "had overstepped any acceptable margin of appreciation in this regard". It also ruled that "the retention in question constituted a disproportionate interference with the applicants' right to respect for private life and could not be regarded as necessary in a democratic society".

The ruling is widely thought to be a blow to the UK Labour Government and could have major implications for the DNA database, and raises issues on how samples are obtained and under what conditions they can be retained.

Current laws allows the DNA profiles of everyone arrested for a recordable offence in England, Wales and Northern Ireland to be recorded on and retained on the DNA database, regardless of whether they are charged or convicted.

At present the database holds details of about 4.5m people in the UK, one in five of which have no current criminal record.

Following the judgment the home secretary said: "The existing law will remain in place while we carefully consider the judgment." 

Whilst others including Liberty's Director Shami Chakrabarti welcomed the ruling, saying "This is one of the most strongly worded judgments that Liberty has ever seen from the Court of Human Rights. This ruling does not affect Scotland, which routinely destroys samples where there is no charge or upon a case being dropped or a person acquitted.

Last Updated: 8th October 2009