DNA technology Bill: features, debate, and why it was withdrawn

The DNA Bill

The Bill had three primary objectives. First, it sought to set up a DNA profiling board as the regulatory body, one of the functions of which would be to provide accreditation to laboratories authorised to carry out DNA sample tests. The Bill also provided for the creation of databases — DNA Data Banks — for storing of DNA information collected from convicts and accused. This database could be indexed and searched for matching samples from crime scenes. And third, it sought to facilitate collection of DNA samples from the convicts and accused.

The Bill contained extensive provisions detailing the proposed functioning of this new system, and had checks and balances for preventing abuse or misuse.

The use of DNA technology for identification purposes is already prevalent in India. In the criminal justice system, DNA fingerprinting is often relied upon, and is considered valid evidence. However, in the absence of a regulatory mechanism, the use of this technology was extremely limited. According to the Department of Biotechnology, about 3,000 DNA tests are carried out every year, which represents just about 2-3 per cent of the potential requirement. An increase in testing capacity could be extremely important in cases of missing children, about one lakh every year, and identification of unclaimed bodies in disasters and accidents, nearly 40,000 every year.

The new regulatory framework would have also led to the development and adoption of standards and best practices for carrying out DNA tests, and for the storage and maintenance of DNA samples.

The objections

The primary objections were on grounds of privacy, utility and possibility of misuse. DNA information can be very intrusive, revealing not just identification traits but also many other features that can be liable for misuse. Critics pushed for inclusion of as many safeguards into the Bill as was possible. Several rounds of discussions, with Members of Parliament, legal experts, law enforcement professionals, activists, and civil society were held. A number of changes were made in the original draft.

But it was not acceptable to all. In recent years, apprehensions were raised about the possibility of this law being used for racial profiling. It was even argued that the police could not be trusted to seek DNA tests in their investigations. The Parliamentary Standing Committee had objected to the setting up of DNA banks in every state, and suggested that one national DNA bank was sufficient.

The other Bill

Unable to get the DNA Bill passed in Parliament, the government last year included several of its provisions in the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill that was brought in to replace the Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920. The provisions related to collection, storage, access and sharing of DNA information, that were part of the DNA Bill, have more or less been included in the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Bill. This Bill was introduced and passed by both Houses of Parliament within three days in April 2019.

Some members pointed out that the government was attempting to pass the provisions of the DNA Technology Bill through the backdoor, and tried to refer it to a parliamentary committee for further discussions, but could not succeed.

With a 2005 amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code opening the door for the legal use of DNA fingerprinting technologies, and the 2019 Act authorising law enforcement agencies to collect, store and share DNA information under prescribed conditions, the immediate needs for the use of DNA technology in criminal investigations have been taken care of.

What has been left out is the creation of the regulatory environment, the development and adoption of standards and best practices in DNA testing, and capacity building in this area through accreditation of more laboratories equipped to handle DNA tests.