NAVIGATION MAIN MENU

COMPENDIUM LIBRARY/TWITTER MONITOR
VIDEO GALLERY
Economic News
Newsbrief Archives
Democrat Leadership Twitter and Realtime Feeds
Cabinet twitter and realtime feeds
North America weblog
International weblog
Democrats twitter directory
Latest Government Jobs and Public Tenders
Jobs Matrix
Global Travel Information
Pop Entertainment Forum
Start Portal


Please make a donation to support upkeep of the daily news journal, back archives, twitter feeds and the compendium library.










British DNA database violates human rights, court

Daily newsbrief journal for December 2008, also see http://www.usdemocrats.com/brief for a global 100-page perpetual brief and follow twitter @usdemocrats


British DNA database violates human rights, court

Postby admin » Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:12 am

British DNA database violates human rights, court
« Thread Started on Dec 4, 2008, 7:32am »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
British DNA database violates human rights, court rules
Posted: 06:38 AM ET
By Richard Allen Greene
CNN
(CNN) — The British police practice of keeping DNA records of anyone
they arrest violates human rights, The European Court of Human Rights ruled
unanimously Thursday.

Two Britons took the case to the court after the police retained their
fingerprints and DNA when criminal cases against them ended without conviction.
Both then requested that their fingerprints, DNA samples and profiles be
destroyed — but their request was denied on the basis of a British law
authorizing it to be retained indefinitely.

The court awarded them 42,000 euros ($53,000) to cover their legal costs.

The court was “struck by the blanket and indiscriminate nature of the
power of retention in England and Wales,” it said in a statement announcing the
ruling.

It ruled the British practice was a violation of the “right to respect
for private and family life” under Article 8 of the European Convention of
Human Rights. The applicants also complained under Article 14, which prohibits
discrimination, but the court said it was not necessary to examine the second
complaint separately.

The two applicants are both from the northern English city of Sheffield.
One, Michael Marper, was arrested in March 2001 and charged with harassment of
his partner. The case was formally discontinued three months later when he and
his partner reconciled.

The second applicant, a minor identified in court papers only as S., was
arrested in January 2001, aged 11, for attempted robbery. He was acquitted in
June 2001, on the same day the case against Marper was dropped.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 82092
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:00 am

Return to December 2008

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests