Juristic Dimensions and Historical Perspectives on DNA as Scientific Evidence: An International Perspective
Keywords:
DNA Profiling, Forensic Science, Legal Frameworks, Ethical Concerns, DNA Evidence, Genetic Privacy, DNA Databases, Forensic Genetics, Rapid DNA Technology, DNA PhenotypingAbstract
This study examines DNA's juristic dimensions and historical evolution as scientific evidence, highlighting its transformative impact on global legal systems. From the groundbreaking discovery of the DNA double helix to the integration of DNA profiling in the 1980s, the paper delves into the applications of DNA evidence in forensic science. By analyzing practices across jurisdictions such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Pakistan, the study emphasizes advancements like familial DNA searching, rapid DNA technology, and forensic phenotyping. It discusses the pivotal role of DNA evidence in solving crimes, exonerating the innocent, and influencing legislative frameworks. However, concerns over privacy, ethical challenges, and disproportionate impacts on marginalized communities are critically addressed. The paper advocates for transparent legal standards, international cooperation, and the ethical application of DNA evidence to ensure justice while safeguarding human rights.
References
Ali Haider Alias Papu v. Jameel Hussain and others, PLD 2021 SC 362.
Andrews v. Florida, No. 87-1876 (Fla. 5th Dist. Ct. App. 1989).
Australian Government. (1914). Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s. 23WA.
Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC). (2005). Uniform evidence law (ALRC Report 102), Chapter 9: The opinion rule and its exceptions: Opinions based on specialised knowledge.
Berger, M. (2003). Expert testimony in criminal proceedings: Questions Daubert does not answer. Seton Hall Law Review, 33, 1125.
Berry, D. A. (1991). Inferences using DNA profiling in forensic identification and paternity cases. Statistical Science, 6(2), 175–205.
Butler, J. M. (2015). The future of forensic DNA analysis. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, 370(1674), 1–10.
Butler, J. M., & Willis, S. (2020). Interpol review of forensic biology and forensic DNA typing 2016–2019. Forensic Science International: Synergy, 2, 352–367.
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
Department of Justice Canada. (2002). DNA data bank consultation paper [PDF]. Government of Canada.
Devlin, B., Risch, N., & Roeder, K. (1992). Forensic inference from DNA fingerprints. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 87(420), 337–350.
Dhillon, M., Narain, M., Mishra, P., Kansra, D., Chowdhury, N., & Puneeth, P. (2019). The DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill, 2019: A critical analysis.
Doleac, J. L. (2017). The effects of DNA databases on crime. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 9(1), 165–201.
Findlay, M., & Grix, J. (2003). Challenging forensic evidence? Observations on the use of DNA in certain criminal trials. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 14(3), 269–282.
Formici, G. (2021). From "familial searching" to "forensic genetic genealogy": New frontiers–and challenges–of DNA analysis in criminal investigations. BioLaw Journal-Rivista di BioDiritto, 1S, 305–328.
Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923).
GeneWatch UK. (2005). The Police National DNA Database: Balancing crime detection, human rights and privacy.
Gill, P. (2014). Misleading DNA evidence: Reasons for miscarriages of justice. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Heffernan, L. (2010). Scientific evidence: Fingerprint and DNA. Bloomsbury Professional.
Hickok, E. (2012). Draft Human DNA Profiling Bill (April): High-level concerns.
Hindmarsh, R. (2008). Australian biocivic concerns and governance of forensic DNA technologies: Confronting technocracy. New Genetics and Society, 27(3), 267–284.
House of Commons. (2006). POSTnote 258: Forensic DNA profiling.
http://www.genewatch.org/uploads/f03c6d66a9b354535738483clc3d49e4/NationalDNADatabase.pdf
https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/7979/html/
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2013.07.004
https://nij.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh171/files/media/document/andrews-v-florida.pdf
https://policepolicy.nz/policies/dna-sampling/u-avguu/dna-sampling-060723.pdf
https://prsindia.org/billtrack/the-dna-technology-use-and-application-regulation-bill-2019
https://www.esr.cri.nz/news-publications/about-the-dna-databank/
https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cons/dna-adn/dna-adn.pdf
https://www.lawcom.govt.nz/assets/Publications/IssuesPapers/NZLC-IP43.pdf
https://www.lawcom.govt.nz/assets/Publications/Reports/NZLC-R144.pdf
https://www.legislation.gov.au
https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/post/postpn258.pdf
Institute of Environmental Science and Research (ESR). (2024). About the DNA databank.
Jindal Global Law School. (2017). In rape cases, DNA evidence would not be conclusive proof: Calcutta High Court. Jindal Global University.
Kang & Co. (2024). The use of DNA in criminal investigations.
Lee, H., & Tirnady, F. (2003). Blood evidence: How DNA is revolutionizing the way we solve crimes. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Lisa L. Smith. (2011). The role of pre-trial attitudes about forensic science evidence: Developing and testing a forensic evidence evaluation bias scale. (PhD thesis, University of Leicester).
Maguire, C. N., McCallum, L. A., Storey, C., & Whitaker, J. P. (2014). Familial searching: A specialist forensic DNA profiling service utilizing the National DNA Database® to identify unknown offenders via their relatives – The UK experience. Forensic Science International: Genetics, 8, 1–9.
Marcus Smith, & Monique Mann. (2015). Recent developments in DNA evidence. Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, 506,
Murphy, E. (2007). The new forensics: Criminal justice, false certainty, and the second generation of scientific evidence. California Law Review, 95(3), 721–797.
New Zealand Court of Appeal. (2011). Shepherd v. R. [NZCA 666].
New Zealand Court of Appeal. (2017). AM v. R. [NZCA 345].
New Zealand Law Commission. (2007). Issues paper 43: The role of DNA evidence in criminal investigations.
New Zealand Law Commission. (2014). The search for criminal liability: A review of the law relating to criminal responsibility (NZLC R144).
New Zealand Police. (2023). DNA sampling.
Parliament. (2018). Disclosure of evidence in criminal cases [Oral evidence].
PRS India. (2019). The DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill, 2019.
R. v. Bourguignon, (1991). O. J. No. 2670 (Q.L).
R. v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire, (2003). 1 All ER 148 at 155 (CA).
R. v. Grant. (2008). EWCA Crim 1890.
R. v. Legere. (1994). 401 A.P.R. 321 (New Brunswick Ct. App).
R. v. Melaragniy. (1992). 73 CCC (3d) 348.
Rao Munir, R., Abbas, R. Z., & Arshed, N. (2021). DNA profiling and databasing: An analysis of issues and challenges in the criminal justice system of Pakistan. Medicine, Science and the Law, 61(1), 27–33.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Javaria Rasheed, Dr. Sayyeda Fatima
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
LEGALOPEDIA EDUCATINIA (PVT) LTD