The draft report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science and Technology has raised concerns about potential misuse of the DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill, 2018 for caste or community-based profiling. This follows various provisions proposed in the bill including the ability to establish identities for a variety of matters, creating national and regional DNA data banks, and storing DNA profiles.
A Brief Background
A similar bill had been passed in Lok Sabha in 2018 but failed to garner support in the Rajya Sabha. A revised version of this bill was then referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science and Technology, Environment and Forests for re-examination in 2019.
Crucial Provisions of The Bill
The Bill proposes the use of DNA technology to establish the identities of individuals in crime-related matters, parentage disputes, immigration/emigration issues, and organ transplantation cases. It involves the establishment of both national and regional DNA databanks. Each databank will maintain a separate crime scene index, suspects’ index, undertrial’s index, and offenders’ index.
Potential Misuse of Sensitive Information
The committee expressed caution that DNA profiles could reveal highly sensitive information such as ancestry, skin color, behavioral traits, health status and disease susceptibility. Access to such intrusive details could be misused for targeted attacks on individuals or their families, possibly even falsely associating certain castes or communities with criminal activity.
The Controversy Surrounding DNA Profile Storage
The bill includes a proposal for storing the DNA profiles of suspects, victims, and their relatives for future investigations. It also suggests storage of DNA profiles related to civil matters but makes no mention of a separate index for these. The committee has questioned the necessity of such storage, highlighting a potential conflict with personal privacy rights and an apparent lack of associated public interest.
The Concept of Perfunctory Consent
The issue of ‘perfunctory consent’ is raised within the bill, allowing a magistrate to override individual consent. The bill however fails to provide clear guidelines on circumstances when this could be applied creating concerns around potential misuse of power.
Accused DNA Profile Retention and Data Protection
Another controversial provision allows the perpetual retention of DNA found at crime scenes, even if the associated conviction is overturned. The committee urged independent scrutiny for proposals related to sample destruction and database removal of DNA profiles. They also highlighted concerns over robust data protection measures, given the huge number of DNA profiles set to be placed in the National DNA Data bank and regional centers.
The Need for The Bill
There is an evident need for DNA testing in India, currently limited to less than 3,000 cases per year across approximately 15-18 laboratories. This represents only 2-3% of total requirement and lacks regulation or monitoring standards. The new bill can help identify missing children (estimated at 100,000 annually), deceased persons, disaster victims, and repeat offenders for severe crimes such as rape and murder.
A Global Perspective
According to US Interpol’s 2016 Global DNA Profiling Survey Results, 69 countries including the USA, Canada and China, maintain national DNA databases. These hold genetic information of at least 35,413,155 individuals. Regulations differ between countries regarding collection, removal, and retention of samples.
Gene Mapping vs. DNA Profiling
The Indian Ministry of Science and Technology recently approved the Genome India Project (GIP), aiming to map 10,000 genomes from across the country. Unlike DNA profiling which primarily helps identify individuals for forensic and criminal investigation, gene mapping involves sequencing the entire genome and is used more for scientific and medical purposes.
A Way Forward
Given its potential in solving crimes, DNA can be an important tool but must be regulated to ensure reliable policing, trusted chain of custody, reliable analysis, and proper use in court. There is also a need to keep civilian and criminal DNA databases separate and implement a privacy or data protection bill that would protect individual rights. A cost-benefit analysis of maintaining large databases should also be considered as it may not always be a cost-effective means of solving more crimes.
