Establishment of a national DNA database in the Republic of Serbia: Legal aspects and implications for the future

Abstract

Forensic DNA databases have been established in the vast majority of European countries and represent an essential personal identification instrument in the criminal justice system. The implementation of suitable legislation and accompanying legal practice is an imperative to ensure sensible use of the DNA repository, without interfering with the rights, freedoms and privacy of individuals and their families. Thus, the complex matter of DNA databank effectiveness and intrusiveness is a delicate balancing act, which has resulted in diverse database governing regimes among different countries. In 2018, the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia passed the first Law on the National DNA Register, which was created by the Ministry of Interior. This short and imprecise regulation was announced without prior consultation with professional stakeholders or the public, resulting in controversy. In this article, we examine essential questions pertinent to launching a forensic DNA database through the lens of the new Law on the National DNA Register in the Republic of Serbia and in comparison to the other European approaches and guidelines to regulating forensic DNA repositories. We further discuss the resulting legal, social and ethical implications and concerns and propose future actions intended to improve the legal framework. We believe that stimulating such discussions throughout the scientific and professional community will result in the advancement of DNA profiling and databasing in a future European Union member state and, more generally, the manner in which biological data are managed in various countries, particularly those that are developing.

Keywords

Forensic database Serbia legislation data protection privacy

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Council of the European Union. Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime. Off J Eur Union 2008; 210: 1–11.

Interpol GD. Global DNA profiling survey results 2016. INTERPOL, Lyon, France, 2016.

Santos

and Machado

Patterns of exchange of forensic DNA data in the European Union through the Prüm system. Sci Justice 2017; 57: 307–313.

Obradovic

Review of some provisions of the Law on the National DNA Register (in Serbian). Prav Inform 2018; 04: 18–21.

Williams

and Wienroth

Identity, mass fatality and forensic genetics. New Genet Soc 2014; 33: 257–276.

Derikonjić

Zakon o DNK registru na javnoj analizi, http://www.politika.rs/sr/clanak/390664/Zakon-o-DNK-registru-na-javnoj-analizi (2017, accessed 5 July 2021).

Živić

Zakon o DNK registru – razočaran i beli medved, https://www.bbc.com/serbian/cyr/srbija-43519196 ( 2018, accessed 5 July 2021).

Council of Europe Committee of Ministers. Recommendation No. R (92) 1 of The Committee of Ministers to Member States, on the use of analysis of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) within the framework of the criminal justice system. 1992. Available from: https://rm.coe.int/09000016804e54f7.

Thibedeau

AD.

National forensic DNA databases. Cambridge, MA: Council for Responsible Genetics, 2011.

10.

Forensic Genetics Policy Initiative. Establishing best practice for forensic DNA databases. Windsor: Forensic Genetics Policy Initiative, 2017.

11.

Nešić

and Vučković

Implementation of a quality management system in the National Crime-Technical Center of the Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Serbia in accordance with International Standard SRPS ISO/IEC 17025: 2006 (ISO/IEC 17025: 2005). Thematic Conference Proceedings of International Significance Archibald Reiss Days; 2015 March 3-4; Belgrade, Serbia. Belgrade: Academy of Criminalistic and Police Studies; 2015.

12.

Gamero

J-J

Romero

J-L

Peralta

J-L

, et al. A study of Spanish attitudes regarding the custody and use of forensic DNA databases. Forensic Sci Int Genet 2008; 2: 138–149.

13.

Wallace

Jackson

Gruber

, et al. Forensic DNA databases – ethical and legal standards: a global review. Egyptian J Forensic Sci 2014; 4: 57–63.

14.

Ilić

Majić

Beljanski

, et al.

Commentary on the Criminal Procedure Code.

Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia 2013; 379–380.

15.

Nuffield Council on Bioethics. The forensic use of bioinformation: Ethical issues. Nuffield; 2007. Available from: https://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/wp-content/uploads/The-forensic-use-of-bioinformation-ethical-issues.pdf.

16.

ENFSI report on DNA legislation in Europe [Internet]. 2016. Available from: https://enfsi.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/enfsi_report_on_dna_legislation_in_europe_0.pdf.

17.

Voultsos

Njau

Tairis

, et al. Launching the Greek forensic DNA database. The legal framework and arising ethical issues. Forensic Sci Int Genet 2011; 5: 407–410.

18.

McCartney

Forensic DNA sampling and the England and Wales National DNA Database: a sceptical approach. Crit Criminol 2004; 12: 157–178.

19.

Carling

Less privacy please, we’re British: investigating crime with DNA in the UK and the US. Hastings Int Comp Law Rev 2008; 31: 487.

20.

Wallace

The UK national DNA database. EMBO Rep 2006; 7: S26–S30.

21.

Mansel

and Davies

Minors or suspects? A discussion of the legal and ethical issues surrounding the indefinite storage of DNA collected from children aged 10–18 years on the National DNA Database in England and Wales. Med Sci Law 2012; 52: 187–192.

22.

Tozzo

Pegoraro

and Caenazzo

Biobanks for non-clinical purposes and the new law on forensic biobanks: does the Italian context protect the rights of minors?

J Med Ethics 2010; 36: 775–778.

23.

Forensic Genetics Policy Initiative.DNA databases and human rights [Internet]. 2012. Available from: http://dnapolicyinitiative.org/resources/dna-databases-and-human-rights/.

24.

Samuels

Dwyer

Halberstadt

, et al. Collecting DNA from juveniles. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Justice Policy Center, 2011.

25.

United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. United Nations guidelines for the prevention of juvenile delinquency (the Riyadh guidelines). A/RES/45/112. Adopted December 14, 1990.

26.

European Court of Human Rights. Grand Chamber judgment: S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom, 880 04.12.2008. Available from: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/app/conversion/pdf/?library=ECHR&id=003-2571936-2784147&filename=003-2571936-2784147.pdf

27.

Hepple

Forensic databases: implications of the cases of S and Marper. Med Sci Law 2009; 49: 77–87.

28.

ENFSI Expert DNA Working Group. ENFSI document on DNA database management [Internet]. 2017. Available from: https://enfsi.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/DNA-databasemanagement-review-and-recommendatations-april-2017.pdf.

29.

Amankwaa

AO.

Forensic DNA retention: public perspective studies in the United Kingdom and around the world. Sci Justice 2018; 58: 455–464.

30.

European Court of Human Rights. European Convention on Human Rights as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14 Supplemented by Protocols Nos. 1, 4, 6, 7, 12, 13 and 16. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2020.

31.

Amankwaa

and McCartney

The UK national DNA database: implementation of the protection of freedoms act 2012. Forensic Sci Int 2018; 284: 117–128.

32.

Staley

The police national DNA database: balancing crime detection, human rights and privacy: a report for GeneWatch UK. GeneWatch UK, 2005.

33.

Thompson

Taroni

and Aitken

CG.

How the probability of a false positive affects the value of DNA evidence. J Forensic Sci 2003; 48: 1–8.

34.

Skinner

and Wienroth

Was this an ending? The destruction of samples and deletion of records from the UK police national DNA database. BJHS Themes 2019; 4: 99–121.

35.

Corte-Real

Forensic DNA databases.

Forensic Sci Int 2004; 146: S143–S144.

36.

Bošković

DNA databases and privacy law, freedom, security: the right to privacy. Novi Sad: Provincial Protector of Citizens – Ombudsman and Institute of Criminological and Sociological Research, 2017, p.396.

37.

Čarnić

Potvrđen identitet Stojana Župljanina, https://www.rts.rs/page/stories/ci/story/1/politika/1087/potvrdjen-identitet-stojana-zupljanina.html (2008, accessed 5 July 2021).

38.

Teodorović

Mijović

Nenadić

, et al. Attitudes regarding the national forensic DNA database: survey data from the general public, prison inmates and prosecutors’ offices in the Republic of Serbia. Forensic Sci Int Genet 2017; 28: 44–51.

39.

Tegner Anker

Doleac

and Landersø

The effects of DNA databases on the deterrence and detection of offenders. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2811790.

40.

Wilson-Kovacs

Wyatt

and Hauskeller

‘A Faustian bargain?’ Public voices on forensic DNA technologies and the National DNA Database. New Genet Soc 2012; 31: 285–298.

41.

Krimsky

and Simoncelli

Genetic justice: DNA data banks, criminal investigations, and civil liberties. New York: Columbia University Press, 2012.

42.

Gen-ethisches Netzwerk e.V. Finger weg von meiner DNA [Stop the police’s DNA collection frenzy!], 2011. Available from: https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/18791222/open-letter-finger-weg-von-meiner-dna.

43.

Williams

and Wienroth

Social and ethical aspects of forensic genetics: a critical review.

Forensic Sci Rev 2017; 29: 145–169.

44.

Machado

and Silva

Public participation in genetic databases: crossing the boundaries between biobanks and forensic DNA databases through the principle of solidarity. J Med Ethics 2015; 41: 820–824.

45.

Santos

Machado

and Silva

Forensic DNA databases in European countries: is size linked to performance?

Life Sci Soc Policy 2013; 9: 12.

46.

DNA Database System Oversight Committee. 2018 Annual Report. 2018. Available from: http://opac.oireachtas.ie/AWData/Library3/JUQdoclaid13062019_114042.pdf.

47.

Curtis

Public perceptions and expectations of the forensic use of DNA: results of a preliminary study. Bull Sci Technol Soc 2009; 29: 313–324.

48.

Freedom House. Freedom in the World 2019 (Serbia). 2019. Available from: https://freedomhouse.org/country/serbia/freedom-world/2019.

49.

Samuel

and Kennett

The impact of investigative genetic genealogy: perceptions of UK professional and public stakeholders. Forensic Sci Int Genet 2020; 48: 102366.

50.

Simoncelli

Dangerous excursions: the case against expanding forensic DNA databases to innocent persons.

J Law Med Ethics 2006; 34: 390–397.

51.

McCartney

The DNA expansion programme and criminal investigation. Br J Criminol 2006; 46: 175–192.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.17 MB