S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom

S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom

S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom

Summary of facts

The case of S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom gained great fame in the public. The case became a battle for the segment of the public that valued their privacy and did not wish to have their DNA samples and fingerprints stored and the government that has been moving ahead with increasing its data base of the DNA samples collected. The applicant Mr. S was a minor when he was arrested on charges of an attempted robbery at an early age of 11 years. His DNA samples and fingerprints were taken. However, he was later acquitted. This however, did not entitle him to press for the destruction of his records as the circumstances in which his DNA samples and fingerprints were taken underlined. The other person Mr. Marper too had his DNA samples and fingerprints taken while he was being prosecuted and even though he reached reconciliation with his partner and the charges were dropped, yet it did not allow him to the privilege of his records being destroyed as they were taken legally while he was being detained lawfully.

Both the appellants failed to justify their stance of appealing for the destruction of their DNA samples and fingerprints record by the police. Their appeals were also rejected by the judicial review of the police decision and the administration court in 2002. The court of appeal also rejected the appellants' appeal in 2004. However, they found some solace in the European Court of Human Rights that ruled in their favor and awarded damages.

The DNA Database of the UK is one of the largest in the world. This has led to various concerns from various people and groups which have questioned the scope and usage of these DNA records. The DNA database is used to solve crime and prosecute runaway criminals. Many people which included children who were arrested on different charges, but later termed innocent had their DNA samples taken.

The DNA fingerprinting was invented by Professor Alec Jeffrey. He regards taking of the genetic information by the police of that person who has been cleared of a crime as being wrong. He termed this practice to be discriminatory and called for establishing a national database of DNA which would include DNA samples of every individual. This he maintained would not allow any particular individual to be discriminated against. However, considering the societal norms and the values upheld by the public, such proceedings are likely to draw vast criticism from the public. It is important to note that the court ruling regarding Mr. S and Mr. Marker came on the same day when Professor Jeffrey stated his concern. The ruling of the court means that the police will now have the right to retain DNA samples and fingerprints of the persons who have been arrested and charged with a crime, even though they have never been ...