What's New

Centre withdraws DNA Bill: What it says, and what are the objections against it.

GS Paper 3 – Biotechnology, Government Policies & Interventions.

Data Protection Bill: Key Contents and Concerns Explained | Data Protection Bill 2023

Current Situation: The Union government withdrew the DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill, 2019, from the Lok Sabha. First proposed in 2003, the Bill has gone through numerous changes, the panel’s report was released, in which it highlighted the fears of a number of MPs, saying the Bill could be misused to target segments of society based on religion, caste or political views.

Associated Issues with the Bill-

• Violation of Right to Privacy:

There are criticisms that the DNA profiling bill is a violation of human rights as it could also compromise the privacy of the individuals. Also, questions are being raised on how the bill plans to safeguard the privacy of DNA profiles stored in the databanks as the bill follows a long list of bills that are being introduced without the data protection law in place.

• Complicate Criminal Investigations:

Using DNA effectively during criminal investigations requires proper crime scene examination, trained and reliable policing, a trusted chain of custody of samples, reliable analysis, and proper use of expert evidence in court. Without these prerequisites, a DNA database will exacerbate rather than solve problems in the criminal justice system.

For example, false matches or misinterpretation or planting of evidence can lead to the travesty of justice.

• Biological Surveillance:

All DNA footprints at a crime scene might not be of those associated with the incident. There is apprehension, therefore, that the DNA repository proposed by the Bill could end up bundling information of people who have nothing to do with the crime being investigated. Thus, it may allow state-sanctioned biological surveillance.

• Inadequate Supporting Infrastructure:

The committee has also flagged the concerns over the lack of infrastructure for conducting   DNA tests in the country. Presently, the labs in the country can fulfill only 2-3% of the country’s DNA profiling requirement. In Rajiv Singh v. State of Bihar (2011), the Supreme Court had dismissed improperly analyzed DNA evidence.

• Affecting Marginalized Sections:

One of the longstanding defects of India’s criminal justice system is the lack of legal aid systems to help both victims and accused, especially those from marginalized sections of society. A growing body of literature has shown that most people charged with criminal offenses are not aware of their rights. This concern may exacerbate when sophisticated technology, such as DNA profiling, is deployed to establish a crime.

• Misuse In Caste-Based Profiling:

The standing committee pointed out that the DNA profiles can reveal extremely sensitive information of an individual & hence could be misused for caste/community-based profiling.

What has the government said?

• The government has defended the Bill by arguing that nearly 60 countries have enacted similar legislation and that all important matters related to privacy, confidentiality and data protection
• It has also claimed that very limited information is proposed to be stored in the indices — just 17 sets of numbers out of billions that DNA samples can reveal.
• These can tell nothing about the individual and only acts act as a unique identifier, it has said.

Way Forward-

• Giving Priority to Privacy Protection: The government is bestowed with the responsibility of protecting the citizens’ privacy. The easiest way to achieve this would be prior adoption of a privacy or Data protection bill, 2019. This would allow individuals some recourse if their rights were not protected.
• Establishing Independent Regulator: The Bill’s proposed DNA Regulatory Board is still too powerful and insufficiently transparent or accountable. Therefore, consideration should be given to an independent forensic science regulator to ensure oversight of both laboratory quality assurance and crime scene examination.
• Ensuring Transparency: With a new system of indexing DNA profiles of undertrials, criminals, missing and deceased persons, it becomes all the more important to think about the openness of the techniques of DNA profiling.
• Addressing Human & Infrastructure Requirements: The effective and just use of this technology will require educating a range of criminal justice functionaries — police, lawyers, magistrates.
• Apart from this, the infrastructural issues linked with the number of labs need to be addressed.