The police authority took samples of DNA and fingerprints from the claimants whilst under arrest. After their cases had been dismissed or failed, they requested destruction of the samples and records, but this was refused.
Held: There was no engagement of the applicants’ art 8 rights to privacy. Even if there was, the keeping of the records would be justified under art 8.2. The new section of the 1984 Act was clear, and anyone would know what would happen with samples and fingerprints taken; they would be retained in the absence of special reason otherwise. The provision was ‘necessary in a democratic society for the prevention of disorder or crime’ and was proportionate.
Judges:
Lord Justice Rose and Mr Justice Leveson
Citations:
Times 04-Apr-2002, [2002] EWHC 478 (Admin), [2002] 1 WLR 3223
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 8.1 8.2, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 64(1A), Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 82
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appealed to – Regina (on the application of S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, Regina (Marper) v Same CA 12-Sep-2002
The applicants had been charged with offences, but later acquitted. On arrest they had had DNA samples and fingerprints taken, and the details added to the national DNA database. The police refused to remove the records after the acquittals.
Cited by:
Appeal from – Regina (on the application of S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, Regina (Marper) v Same CA 12-Sep-2002
The applicants had been charged with offences, but later acquitted. On arrest they had had DNA samples and fingerprints taken, and the details added to the national DNA database. The police refused to remove the records after the acquittals.
At First Instance – S, Regina (on Application of) v South Yorkshire Police; Regina v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police ex parte Marper HL 22-Jul-2004
Police Retention of Suspects DNA and Fingerprints
The claimants complained that their fingerprints and DNA records taken on arrest had been retained after discharge before trial, saying the retention of the samples infringed their right to private life.
Held: The parts of DNA used for testing . .
At First Instance – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 4-Dec-2008
(Grand Chamber) The applicants complained that on being arrested on suspicion of offences, samples of their DNA had been taken, but then despite being released without conviction, the samples had retained on the Police database.
Held: . .
At First Instance – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 27-Feb-2008
Grand Chamber – Press Release – The applicant complained of the retention by the police of DNA and fingerprint records – The applicants both complain about the retention of their fingerprints and DNA samples and the fact that they are being used in . .
At First Instance – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 16-Jan-2007
Decision as to admissibility – the applicants complained of the retention by police of DNA and fingerprint samples and records.
Held: Admissible. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice, Police, Human Rights
Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.168121
