header-logo header-logo

Law reports Edited by the All England Law Reporters

11 December 2008
Issue: 7349 / Categories: Features , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Human Rights—Privacy—Retention of fingerprints and DNA samples
S and another v United Kingdom (App Nos 30562/04 and 30566/04)
European Court of Human Rights, 4 December 2008
The blanket and indiscriminate nature of the powers of retention of fingerprints, cellular samples and DNA profiles of persons suspected but not convicted of offences constitutes a violation of Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights

The police lawfully took fingerprints and DNA samples from the applicants in two separate cases after each had been arrested and charged. Neither had previous convictions. One of the applicants was acquitted and proceedings against the other were discontinued.

Section 64(1A) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) authorised the police to retain such fingerprints or DNA samples after they had fulfilled the purposes for which they had been taken, and provided that they were not to be used “except for purposes related to the prevention or detection of crime, the investigation of an offence or the conduct of a prosecution”. The chief constable decided to retain the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll