Universal forensic DNA databases: acceptable or illegal under the European Court of Human Rights regime?

IF 2.5 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Journal of Law and the Biosciences Pub Date : 2021-06-25 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1093/jlb/lsab022
Oliver M Tuazon
{"title":"Universal forensic DNA databases: acceptable or illegal under the European Court of Human Rights regime?","authors":"Oliver M Tuazon","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsab022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Universal forensic DNA databases are controversial <i>privacy-wise</i> given their omnibus scope of incorporating DNA profile data of the entire population into the system. Following the landmark decision of the European Court of Human Rights on the retention of DNA profiles in <i>S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom</i>, two differing opinions emerged on its application to universal databases: their acceptability and illegality. This paper makes use of the elements of the right to respect for private life (Article 8 ECHR), distilled from the Court's jurisprudence involving collection and retention of DNA profile data, in the form of tests-preliminary interference, legality, legitimate purpose, and proportionality-in assessing the feasibility of establishing population-wide DNA databases in Europe.</p>","PeriodicalId":56266,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","volume":"8 1","pages":"lsab022"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/3c/b9/lsab022.PMC8231703.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsab022","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Universal forensic DNA databases are controversial privacy-wise given their omnibus scope of incorporating DNA profile data of the entire population into the system. Following the landmark decision of the European Court of Human Rights on the retention of DNA profiles in S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom, two differing opinions emerged on its application to universal databases: their acceptability and illegality. This paper makes use of the elements of the right to respect for private life (Article 8 ECHR), distilled from the Court's jurisprudence involving collection and retention of DNA profile data, in the form of tests-preliminary interference, legality, legitimate purpose, and proportionality-in assessing the feasibility of establishing population-wide DNA databases in Europe.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通用法医DNA数据库:在欧洲人权法院制度下是可接受的还是非法的?
通用法医DNA数据库在隐私方面存在争议,因为它们将整个人口的DNA档案数据纳入系统的综合范围。继欧洲人权法院在S.和Marper诉联合王国一案中就保留DNA档案作出具有里程碑意义的决定之后,关于将其应用于通用数据库出现了两种不同的意见:它们的可接受性和非法性。在评估在欧洲建立全民DNA数据库的可行性时,本文利用了尊重私人生活权利的要素(《欧洲人权公约》第8条),这些要素是从法院涉及收集和保留DNA档案数据的判例中提炼出来的,以测试的形式——初步干预、合法性、合法目的和比例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Law and the Biosciences
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
35
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and the Biosciences (JLB) is the first fully Open Access peer-reviewed legal journal focused on the advances at the intersection of law and the biosciences. A co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press, this open access, online, and interdisciplinary academic journal publishes cutting-edge scholarship in this important new field. The Journal contains original and response articles, essays, and commentaries on a wide range of topics, including bioethics, neuroethics, genetics, reproductive technologies, stem cells, enhancement, patent law, and food and drug regulation. JLB is published as one volume with three issues per year with new articles posted online on an ongoing basis.
期刊最新文献
Accelerating biosimilar market access: the case for allowing earlier standing. Forensic genetics in the shadows. The law for mini-organ prototypes in a dish. Mapping the legal status options for organoids in Swiss law. Intellectual property issues for open science practices in genomic-related health research and innovation in Africa. Uterus transplants and Mexico's rule of law.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1