Canada's DNA Databank ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PsychoSpy 2001/06/04 (NOTE: Page Numbers Based on Original Copy Created under Word Perfect with different formatting) Table of Contents Introduction............................................... Page 1 Overview of Canada's DNA Databank.......................... Page 3 Time Line.................................................. Page 3 History of DNA Legislation in Canada....................... Page 5 Bill C-3........................................... Page 7 Bill C-104......................................... Page 9 DNA Discrimination......................................... Page 12 Corporate Purchase/Use of DNA Samples/Data................. Page 14 Uses for Corporations/Employers.................... Page 14 How DNA Samples Purchase/Use is Possible in Private Sector................. Page 15 Re-Writing History: Nazi Germany with DNA Databank......... Page 16 Future of Canada's DNA Databank............................ Page 18 Conclusion................................................. Page 19 Bibliography............................................... Page 21 Appendix A The basis article for this research project entitled; Canada's DNA Database: Privacy's last stronghold destroyed.. Page 22 Appendix B Recommendations for Bill C-3 made by the Canadian Resource Center for Victims of Crime and The National Justice Network.. Page 28 Appendix C Vocabulary List..................................... Page 33 Introduction Imagine a world where the government, doctors, and police can determine your future from a simple drop of blood. Imagine that they can figure out whether you'll have cancer, whether you'll be weak, or strong, or big, or small. How about if from birth they decide exactly how your life will turn out, how long you'll live, and what type of lifestyle you will be living in. What if you where denied a job because of a simple gene so small the human eye cannot see it, and so mysterious doctors have still much to learn about it? Throughout this research paper, you will learn of Canada's National DNA Databank, the legislation related to it, it's history, and other issues which privacy advocates world wide have brought up regarding the use of this new technology in the databank. The technology to do the things mentioned in the first paragraph is being developed as we speak, some of it has already been developed. Currently scientists are isolating genes in the human DNA which indicate a person being prone to sickness, mental illness, being prone to become a criminal, or to be a violent person. Genes which allow a person to determine your past, present, and future. Even your lineage, and sexual preference will be able to be gained from a small drop of blood, a flake of skin, or even a fingerprint in the not so distant future. In fact, several governments worldwide are creating a method in which to store DNA information for the nations citizens. One of the countries which are currently and already have developed one of these DNA storage centers is our very own Canada. The following paper will discuss these issues and many, many more which have been brought up by scientists, privacy advocates, and politicians world wide, as well as in our own backyard in Canada. Although this issue is one of world wide importance, this paper will be focused on discussing what is currently happening throughout Canada, and what could happen in the future , pertaining to the DNA Databank. Overview of Canada's DNA Databank Canada's DNA Data Bank has two components. The first is a Crime Scene Index. The CSI contains DNA information obtained from unsolved crime scenes. The second is the Convicted Offenders Index. The COI contains DNA profiles of both adult and young offenders convicted of serious offences such as rape, violent crimes, child pornography etc. All of this DNA data is stored and cross-referenced to decrease the time to solve a serious crime anywhere in the country. It is said that it will help police to quickly apprehend those repeat and violent sex offenders. Canada is one of only a few countries in the world to have a DNA Data Bank system, but many are looking at adopting it's technology. This all sounds amazing from a government propaganda standpoint. However, read on and we may see a seriously different picture for the future. TIME LINE ~~~~~~~~~ 1989 First RCMP conviction using forensic DNA analysis. July 1995 Bill C-104 receives Royal Assent. The Bill amends the Criminal Code and the Young Offenders Act to enable a judge to issue a warrant allowing police to obtain DNA evidence from suspects in a criminal investigation. This is Phase I of the Government of Canada's DNA Strategy, and provides a legislative underpinning to the use of DNA evidence in criminal proceedings. August 1995 The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (CACP) joins hundreds of other organizations across the country in urging the government to create a National DNA Data Bank. January 1996 Phase II of the Government of Canada's DNA Strategy begins with nation-wide consultations on the establishment a National DNA Data Bank. April 1997 Bill C-3 is tabled in the House of Commons. The Bill was to enable creation of a National DNA Data Bank. The Bill is referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights before Second Reading, but dies on the Order Paper when an election is called in June. September 1997 Bill C-3 is re-introduced in the House of Commons. December 1998 Bill C-3 receives Royal Assent. Work begins in earnest to establish the National DNA Data Bank . November 1999 Bill S-10 is tabled in the House of Commons. Based on Senate recommendations, the Bill contains amendments to Bill C-3 including: the taking of fingerprints for identification purposes, the inclusion of designated offenders convicted in the military justice system, and a full legislative review after five years, to be conducted by the Senate. June 2000 Royal Assent in the House of Commons and Proclamation of Bills C-3 and S-10. DNA sample collections are expected to commence immediately following proclamation. History of DNA Legislation In Canada ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The first use of DNA as forensic evidence in a Canadian Court was in April of 1989 in Ottawa, Ontario. The RCMP used DNA analysis in an investigation where a suspect denied involvement in a sexual assault, however, the victim identified him as her attacker. The DNA analysis confirmed the suspect was the perpetrator. When confronted with the DNA results, the suspect changed his plea to guilty. Since then, thousands of people have been convicted of violent crimes, and even cleared of charges. It has also allowed the exoneration and release of innocent people from wrongful convictions. It wasn't until July 1995, however, that anything related to DNA testing and evidence was put into the legislation by Bill C-104. This bill amended the Criminal Code and Young Offenders Act to allow a court judge to issue a warrant to obtain DNA samples from a suspect. This was, really, the first step towards the DNA Data Bank of today. In fact, this event was actually the first stage of Canada's DNA strategy. It allowed the government to have a legal underpinning for the collection and use of DNA evidence in the court system. Now that a legal method of obtaining DNA samples, and the more common use of DNA as evidence in legal proceedings, the government decided to begin moving onto bigger things with DNA. In December of 1998, the DNA Identification Act (Bill C-3) was passed into law. This act is what actually creates the DNA Databank itself. Bill C-3 is discussed in further detail later in this paper. In late 1999 the International Police Chiefs Association (IPCA) was urging legislatures world wide to pass laws which require that a DNA sample be taken from anyone arrested under any charge. By any charge, that would include everything from not paying parking tickets, shoplifting, murder, or impaired driving. The IPCA was supported by the Canadian Police Association (CPA). The CPA used their support for the government's gun control laws to leverage to get what they, and the IPCA wanted. A threatening letter was sent from the CPA to several government officials that the CPA would revoke their support of the upcoming gun control laws, if their DNA demands were not met. The CPA also threatened to release a public announcement that the DNA Data Bank is a "hoax", which would kill the public support the government needed to convince the nation that the data base is a great crime fighting tool and would contribute to the overall public safety, and lower crime rates. The second phase, which we're currently in, is that of the DNA Data Bank which this paper is all about. This phase came into effect on June 30, 2000. Bill C-3 ~~~~~~~~ Bill C-3 was established to create the National DNA Databank itself, which is to be maintained by the RCMP. It basically allows the police and government to collect DNA samples from criminals, past, present, and future. While it is almost always argued that any DNA Databank is better than none at all, Bill C-3 still has some very serious problems. This is highly evident when one looks at the time and money spent to simply get up to the point of entering Bill C-3 into legislation, it is quite obvious that this bill should be written right, not the third or even second time, but the first time, to be both cost and operationally effective. One section of Bill C-3 indicates the conditions by which samples can be taken from offenders whom are already serving a sentence. The ability to obtain samples in this case are limited to three types of offenders. The three are; - A person whom has been declared a Dangerous Offender by the courts - A person whom has been convicted of murdering more than one person on different days - A person whom has been convicted of 2 or more sexual offences, currently serving a sentence of 2 or more years Section 10 of Bill C-3 deals with the actual storage of the blood, saliva, or hair samples taken from people. This section is one of the most controversial issues which surrounds the creation of the DNA Databank. The big question is whether to keep or destroy samples once they have been processed into the computers and databank system. There is, of course, good reasons for both. Because DNA technology is changing at an ever increasing rate, the experts predict that the methods which are used to create the profiles today, will be incompatible with the methods of the future. Much like trying to use old computer punch-cards in one of today's high speed 1 Ghz computers, it just doesn't work that way. Bill C-3 Section 10(1) allows for the retention of "the portions of samples of the bodily substances that the Commissioner considers appropriate." Section 10(2) then continues to allow the Commissioner to do further testing if the technology advance was significant enough to justify further analysis. Section 11 then sets out the penalties for those who may decide to misuse the information or communicate the information to those who do not have the proper authority to receive it. This section is definitely a good thing, and may hold privacy advocates at bay with regards to the abuse of DNA information, obtained by the government. Appendix B lists several recommendations made by the Canadian Resource Center for Victims of Crime and The National Justice Network for Bill C-3. Bill C-104 Bill C-104 was unanimously passed in 1995. Bill C-104 was created to give police the right to seek a warrant to obtain a DNA sample from a suspect of a crime. This bill specifies the criminal offences and guidelines which allow DNA samples to be collected from an individual. These criminal offences are, specifically; Piratical Acts Hijacking Endangering safety of aircraft or airport Seizing control of ship or fixed platform Using explosives Sexual interference Invitation to sexual touching Incest Offence in relation to juvenile prostitution Causing death by criminal negligence Causing bodily harm by criminal negligence Murder Manslaughter Causing bodily harm with intent Failure to stop at scene of accident Assault Assault with a weapon or causing bodily harm Aggravated assault Unlawfully causing bodily harm Torture Assaulting a peace officer Sexual assault Sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm Aggravated sexual assault Kidnaping Hostage taking Robbery Breaking and entering with intent, committing offence or breaking out Mischief that causes actual danger to life Arson - disregard for human life Arson - own property Arson Setting fire to other substance Rape Sexual intercourse with female under fourteen and between fourteen and sixteen Sexual intercourse with feeble-minded etc. If any of the preceding offences have been committed, bodily substances have been found at scene of crime, and if the court has any other reasons to believe the person to be a suspect, the court may issue a warrant to retrieve blood samples for DNA analysis and comparison. Bill C-104 then goes into the appropriate use of DNA samples and analysis within an investigation. It states that the DNA samples and analysis are not to be used except for within the specified investigation for which the sample was taken. If it turns out that the suspects DNA does not match that of the evidence found at the crime scene, the samples will be immediately destroyed. They will also be destroyed if a person is acquitted of the designated offence, unless it is due to an insanity plea, or any other mental disorder. Within the bill are also a few amendments to the Young Offenders Act, which allow the police and courts to take and do a forensic analysis on a young offenders bodily substance, for the purpose to convict them of a crime. DNA Discrimination ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ There is a common fear among both DNA researches and privacy advocates world wide. While the researches are working hard to develop an outline of the human genome, it is feared that isolating genetic diseases and sicknesses will eventually lead to discrimination according to these genes. A good example of this issue was demonstrated in the United States when a fourty-year-old woman was tested positive for the breast cancer gene. After undergoing preventive surgery to remove her ovaries and breasts, she lost her on-job insurance, and eventually her job because of it. As the number of people being genetically tested in both North America, and World wide, the chance of a situation like this happening to the average person increases a great deal. In the near future it will be possible to determine your approximate life span, sexual preferences, physical development, mental development, and possibly even likes and dislikes. Basically, at birth your life will already be known to a certain extent. Imagine knowing from birth that your child is gay, or is going to be very sick, or live a short life. How would you feel? Would you be able to treat that child the same as if it was a normal child? How would society deal with these sudden predispositions about a persons future? It is feared among many that we will end up reverting back to a segmented society, much like the early Americas when the blacks and whites were segmented. You could be hired onto a great job because of your genes, or you could be fired, or not considered in the first place. The biggest problem with this is that you cannot change your genetic make up. You cannot change what your DNA tells people, whereas your skills can change, but the hiring process may only base a small portion of its deciding factors on your actual skills. It is more likely than not that a computer will take the DNA data of all the applicants, and filter out anyone who is prone to sickness or diseases, who is genetically less likely to be on time for work every day, day in day out, and any other traits which they do not wish to have in an applicant. The other traits could include discrimination against a specific lineage, or racial/ethnic background. Once this data has been filtered out, the computer would then, most likely, score each applicant not filtered out, according to the number of positive traits the company wants. Already the company hasn't even seen anything close to an application from a majority of the applicants, and will only see a good 5% of the top of the genetic "pool". Corporate Purchase/Use of DNA Samples and Data ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Uses for Corporations/Employers ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Samples of DNA and the data which they are then converted to, could be of great use to many businesses. As discussed earlier in the DNA Discrimination section, it would be possible for a company to filter out any people with genetic "deficiencies", or who, genetically, are not suitable to what the position that they require to fill entails. Imagine, for example, a company is looking for a new security guard. Any companies ideal security guard would be someone who is well built, quick thinking, relatively intelligent, and able to adapt to new environments/situations quickly. They would not, however, want a small, out of shape, idiot who would fold under any kind of pressure, and isn't too bright. Although they have this requirement, every successful company out there realizes that time is money. If a large corporation posts a job opening for a security guard, they're likely to get thousands of applications, in a large city. Many of the applicants are nowhere near suitable for the job. To reduce the time of searching through applications forms, resumes, and doing interviews, they could very well, require that a DNA sample be given. Using this DNA sample, the company would be able to dynamically filter out the candidates who do not have genes which promote the needed traits. The computer would then only send the remaining applications and resumes to the human resources department, which would then save the company a lot of time. These DNA samples can then also be used to create mental profiles of the companies employees, which would allow the company to decide who is most suitable for what promotions, jobs, etc., according to the mental needs of that job. How DNA Sample Purchase/Use by the Private Sector is Possible ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ By creating a national DNA databank, we are creating profiles and information on thousands of people. Imagine, again, that a company does in fact request that DNA samples be taken upon application for a job. As we discussed in the previous section, companies love to make as much money as possible. What is preventing these companies, then, from selling this data to a private centralized DNA Databank, much like the national one, but run by a group of capitalists who would then go around and sell this data back to the private sector. This group could use the technology and techniques developed, and freely accessible, by the RCMP for their National DNA Databank program. It is also possible, considering the age we're living in, that this company could in fact steal the information from the DNA Databank, and then sell it to the private sector. The private sector could then use this data as a sort of head hunting service. Where, they grab the data of a specific genetic group of people, then filter out the traits they don't want, and get the few people who have the exact genetic traits which they require. This could allow some people to get amazing jobs, while others may have equal, if not superior skills, but will not get the job because they do not "fit" the "genetic profile" of the company in question. Re-Writing History: Nazi Germany with DNA Databank ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ There are very few people who don't know about the mass killings, torturous experiments and racial discrimination carried out during the Nazi reign in Germany during World War II. Thousands of people where executed, gassed, or put to use in experiments during World War II, simply because of their religious beliefs or any imperfections which the government did not want. The biggest number of casualties within this time period was of the Jewish population of Germany. The other large number of casualties was of people with disabilities etc.. Some people during this time where able to escape detection by pretending to not be Jewish, or hiding their disabilities. Now, imagine if the German nation had created a national DNA databank before World War II, and the technology had been there to differentiate between ethnic backgrounds, and other physical/mental traits according to a persons DNA. The Nazis would have had the ability to track down every last Jew, every last person with a disability, and even be pickier about what they would and would not allow in a living human in their nation. Hitler's ideal human was a German, male, with blue eyes, tall, and blonde hair. He detested people with brown eyes, dark hair, and whom were short. With this DNA databank and his criteria, he could easily create a list of people who did not fit his ideal genetic profile, and have the army and/or the SS terminate anyone whom was on that list. Imagine the devastation this would have caused, the thousands of lives who may have been killed on top of those whom already where. Is this the kind of technology you want a nation, no matter how peaceful or passive at the time, to have? Many say not, as it is quite a scary thought. Future of Canada's DNA Databank ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Although it is clear that the creation of this massive database of DNA for all of Canada is a sure thing, what is not so clear is the future of this controversial crime fighting mechanism. The biggest question is raised with privacy issues, and worries of ill use of this information The future of this DNA Databank will, ultimately, be determined by the public response to such a tool, as well as the recommendations of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. It has been recommended by government consultants and privacy advocates that the government allow changes and revisions to be made on DNA legislation according to the recommendations which the Privacy Commissioner issues in his/her yearly report. This, some say, would allow the privacy advocates some safe keeping in knowing that someone is on their side within the government itself, and does have the power to change things. The ultimate question, however, is whether or not the DNA Databank will stay with us into the distant future. Many think, more hope, that this is not the case. Unfortunately, not enough people know about the DNA Databank. The key goal to determining the databank's life span will be the public opinion of it. If the public approves of it, or doesn't know about it at all, then the government will have no problems with it's further use. However, if the general public does learn about it, and does not approve of it, it is almost assured that the government will abolish the system. Conclusion Throughout this paper, the history and general overview of the DNA databank, it's related legislation, and several issues and view points have been brought up. There is certainly advantages to the DNA Databank, however, do the advantages really outweigh the disadvantages? At this point in time, many are of the opinion that the legislation was rushed through the system much too quickly, and due to that, there are several inherent issues with the legislation, as well as the base premise for the creation of such a system, not to mention its potential uses. When one looks at all the information presented in this paper, it is very difficult to disagree that the databank has it's advantages. However, on the flip side, it is also very difficult to disagree that there is definitely major problems, and issues with this relatively new area of technology, and the privacy concerns which it creates. Many people are afraid of the implications of such a database, and the discrimination which it can cause. When one looks back to the Nazi example given in this paper, it is quite scary what this technology could create within our society. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? Or do the disadvantages outweigh the advantages, with our current technology, our current legislation, and at this point in time? The decision is ultimately the readers. "It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. " - Albert Einstein (1879-1955) Bibliography ~~~~~~~~~~~~ BILL C-3 - As passed by the House of Commons; http://www.parl.gc.ca/36/1/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/government/c-3/c-3_3/c-3toce.html EDITED HANSARD - NUMBER 96; http://www.parl.gc.ca/36/2/parlbus/chambus/house/debates/096_2000-05-12/han096_1005-e.htm Bill S-10 First Reading; http://www.parl.gc.ca/36/2/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/government/s-10/s-10_1/S-10TOCE.html Establishing a National DNA Data Bank; http://www.sgc.gc.ca/epub/pol/e199601/e199601.htm Bill C-104: Revolutionizing Criminal Investigations or Infringing on Charter Rights?; http://www.law-lib.utoronto.ca/law-review/utlr54-2/bassan.htm Dictionary.Com http://www.dictionary.com/ Senate Panel Hears About Need for Additional Protections by Jeff Levine; http://www.jobs2us.com/editorial/features/jul00/f_20000725.asp CHAPTER 27 (Bill C-104); http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/1995/27/ SF News - Nov. 2, 2000 - Comment: DNA, fingerprints and ethics; http://www.sfu.ca/mediapr/sfnews/2000/Nov2/comment.html Mein Kampf - Adolf Hitler APPENDIX A Canada's DNA Database: Privacy's last stronghold destroyed Cyb0rg/ASM July 21, 2000 Imagine a society where the government had samples of tissue and fluid from the entire community on file and a computerized databank of each individual's DNA profile. Imagine then that not only law enforcement officials, but insurance companies, employers, schools, adoption agencies, and many other organizations could gain access to those files on a "need to know" basis or on a showing that access is "in the public interest." Imagine then that an individual could be turned down for jobs, insurance, adoption, health care, and other social services and benefits on the basis of information contained in her DNA profile, such as genetic disease, heritage, or someone else's subjective idea of a genetic "flaw." Janet C. Hoeffel, "The Dark Side of DNA Profiling: Unreliable Scientific Evidence Meets the Criminal Defendant", 42 Stanford Law Review 465 at 533-34 (1990). Stop imagining. This is the reality you are being forced into. The Canadian government unveiled this month what it says is the world's most automated and sophisticated DNA database, capable of automatically identifying persons through analysis of minute amounts of blood, semen, or skin cells. DNA as forensic evidence was first used in Canada in 1988. By 1995 it was amended into the Criminal Code by Parliament that law enforcement officers could take DNA samples from Canadian citizens. If you do the math you will realize that they already have 5 years of DNA samples to put into their database. This amendment was created with the database already in mind. The big goal reached by baby steps. Two years later in December of 1998 The DNA Identification Act passed into law. By late 1999, the International Association of Police Chiefs, which represents police agencies in 112 countries, urged legislatures around the globe to pass laws requiring DNA samples from anyone arrested on any charge, whether the charge was murder, impaired driving, or shoplifting. The International Association of Police Chiefs was in turn supported by our own Canadian Police Association (CPA) which sent a letter threatening to withdraw their endorsement of the government's gun-control law unless they got what they wanted, which in turn was what the International Association of Police Chiefs wanted. The CPA also threatened to mount a public campaign denouncing the DNA bank as a "hoax." The government needed the support of the public in their belief that the database would be a major crime-fighting tool and contribute to public safety to have the DNA Identification Act passed into law unchallenged. The Reform Party, and some well-known elected officials side with the view of the International Association of Police Chiefs. This is the future they are fighting for. With blood being taken from every child at birth, and five years of legislated DNA collection already behind them, just how long will it take before the entire population is catalogued by the Canadian government? My guess would be that the task is already completed or nearly so. DNA collection is frighteningly convenient, and less than 1/10 of a pinhead-sized piece of you is required to garner a DNA sample. A piece of hair, a drop a blood, a flake of dead skin... in fact, machines which can suck a DNA sample off of you from a distance are already available. The technology to take DNA from a fingerprint is close to being perfected. Also surprising is the fact that DNA databanks are already widely prevalent in other parts of the world; The United States, Germany, Britain, Norway, Finland, Belgium, and Denmark, just to note a few. In the United States, the International Association of Police Chiefs has also asked the U.S Congress to consider requiring DNA samples from anyone arrested. Rudolph Giuliani, New York City's mayor supports this requirement and is asking to take it one step further. Mr. Giuliani has requested that the state legislature require DNA samples from every newborn baby! In Britain and Scotland already, there is a program of genetic sampling of people charged with any offence, including routine traffic violations. On September 1 1999, a law in Louisiana took effect that required DNA to be taken from people arrested, but not necessarily convicted, of a violent crime. Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide. Clearly, the International Association of Police Chiefs mandate is the construction of an international database to track every individual on the planet. Canada is already negotiating with other nations that possess DNA databanks to set up a system whereby genetic information can be exchanged. One question to ask is: Why are we expected to trust elected officials and law enforcement with this type of information. The information which is the genetic code of our being. When the future they are fighting for is to make us individuals considered 'guilty' at birth. Not to be given the same benefit of the doubt we are supposed to grant them. Now, I am not saying that the databank is wholly a bad idea. It has a lot of good premises. DNA evidence has been proven effective in past cases. I have no problem with the fact that 'violent' (and violent needs a very clear definition) criminals should have their DNA taken. My worry is that present evidence points to these first steps as only the beginning of global oppression. The Canadian Police Association, the Reform Party and others want us to become like Scotland and Britain. In his annual report, Canada's Privacy Commissioner, Bruce Phillips, warns us of the danger this database poses. "Unique personal identifiers and powerful technologies may appear to solve immediate administrative problems but they pose long-term threats to individuals' privacy, a fundamental value in a democratic society". "The greatest danger of a forensic DNA data bank is its potential to engulf a significant part of the population and become a genetic population register. Recovering abducted children, assisting adults with amnesia, providing security for Alzheimer's patients: all could be offered as justification for extending genetic sampling--and would blur the line between forensic and non-forensic uses." Categorical discrimination based on genetic make-up is a realistic concern. As our understanding of the human genome improves the danger becomes greater. "This child has the criminal gene (or the gay gene), write'em off." Genetic discrimination, it's the next great frontier. Our government has already stated that samples will be kept permanently on file so that they can be processed again once more advanced technology becomes available. You may say to yourself, "Go ahead, take my DNA, I have nothing to hide," but the premise that justice supposedly stands on is that we are all 'Innocent until proven guilty.' You shouldn't have to defend yourself when you are not accused of a crime. You shouldn't have to be concerned that you may be implicated in a crime simply based on where you happen to leave a DNA trail. Which just so happens to be *everywhere* you go. Credit Cards and cellular telephones are mere toys of Big Brother compared to DNA tracking. What can you do to stop this? Nothing. You can kick and scream and write your MP and your Prime Minister, but the fact is, the deed has been done and it's full steam ahead. 1984 by 2004. The implications of this database being used for non-forensic purposes conjures up scary images of an Orwellian nightmare where everyone's DNA exists to serve the controlling elect, just as barcodes would a grocery store owner. And you thought Nazi Germany was a thing of the past. Resources: Canada Takes DNA Database Lead: Wired, 07/05/2000 Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs: The Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, to which was referred Bill C-3, respecting DNA identification and to make consequential amendments to the Criminal Code and other Acts, met this day at 10:46 a.m. to give consideration to the bill. 11/26/1998 Privacy Commissioner of Canada's Annual Report (1999-2000) APPENDIX B RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Time when samples are taken: Section 487.051 sets out that samples are to be taken when an accused is found guilty, unlike fingerprints that are taken at the time of arrest. We believe, and would suggest that most Canadians would agree, that samples should be taken at the time of arrest just as fingerprints are. Not to do so is to seriously under use the potential value of DNA evidence. We are simply unable to accept that there is a significant difference between the taking of fingerprints and DNA samples whether it be a spot of blood, a piece of hair, or a sample of saliva. It leaves a huge hole in the system that may allow serial offenders to escape detection. Consider a scenario similar to the one the Canadian Police Association has outlined in the past: The police arrest an individual for a break and enter and released him on bail. What the police do not know is that this individual is responsible for a sexual assault/murder. He knows that if he is convicted of the sexual assault, police will take his DNA, run it through the bank and possibly come up with a match for the murder. If he is implicated in the murder, he gets an automatic life sentence. This individual has two choices hope for an acquittal or flee. Not only is society denied the knowledge that a murder has been solved, they are at risk of another murder being committed. We think that is wrong. While this above scenario may appear dramatic, it could become a reality of the system if C-3 remains unchanged. Given that most suspects are released on bail, and we have a serious problem in this country of suspects on bail fleeing, it is not that hard to envision. This problem is compounded with the fact that if picked up in another province, the suspect may not be returned to face the criminal charges due to cost. Concerns have been raised by some that the taking of samples at the time of arrest will violate the suspect's right to be presumed innocent. The same argument was no doubt made when fingerprints and breathalyzers were first used. Both have withstood Charter challenges, and there is no reason to expect that DNA samples would not also withstand such a challenge. Both the CPA and the Department of Justice have obtained legal opinions that support their respective positions. First of all, we all know that the only opinions that matter in this country belong to the Supreme Court Justices. And second, after reviewing all four legal opinions, it struck me that the former justices who wrote the opinions for the Government were unaware of why the police needed this power. Therefore, their opinions, like this legislation, are flawed. Recommendation #1: That s.487.051 be amended to allow for the taking of samples upon arrest. 2. Exemption from order to provide sample - Section 487.051(1)(a) states that a court shall make an order if the offender is convicted of an offence found in the primary designated offence list. Section 487.051(1)(b) states that a court may make an order if the offender is convicted of an offence on the secondary designated offence list. However, subsection (2) and (3) allow for exemptions from (1)(a) and (b) respectively if the court is satisfied that the offender has established that the impact of the order on the person's privacy or security of the person would be "grossly disproportionate to the public interest in the protection of society and the proper administration of justice, to be achieved through the early detection, arrest and conviction of offenders." When asked to provide a set of facts that would justify such exclusion, the Minster was unable to do so except to say it was there for exceptional circumstances. What these exceptional circumstances could be is a mystery. Either we accept the fact that people convicted of certain crimes must be in the databank, or we do not. If there is no clear reason to allow for the exemption, it should be removed as it will simple occupy valuable court time. It is also a danger to open the door for the court to define such exceptional circumstances for us. That is the role of Parliament, and frankly the courts have been doing more and more of Parliament's job for some time. Recommendation #2: That s.487.051(2) be removed. 3. Offenders already serving a sentence Section 487.055 deals with offenders already serving sentences. Subsections (1)(a) and (b) limit the taking of samples to those offenders who have been (a) declared a dangerous offender (b) those who have murdered more than one person at different times, and (c) those who have been convicted more than once of one or more sexual offences and are serving a sentence of more than two years. If there is a justification for taking the samples of Dangerous Offenders and repeat sex offenders, then there is no logical reason that the justification should not extend to all offenders convicted of the designated offences. They have all committed serious offences and their privacy rights should not override potential public safety concerns. In his opening remarks, the Minister said, "Biological samples are most likely to be found at crime scene in these cases (most serious violent offences), for example, a murder or sexual assault." If DNA evidence is most common in serious violent cases, why exclude the most serious violent offenders (murderers) and why limit it to two-time convicted sex offenders? Consider the number of unsolved murders we have in this country. Is it so inconceivable that there are killers sitting in prison responsible for unsolved murders that DNA may be a factor in? There are hundreds of unsolved murders in BC alone does anyone truly doubt the fact that some of those killers are currently in jail, or on parole? Recommendation #3 expand s.487.055 to include those convicted of offences under the primary designated offence list. 4. Offenders on parole Section 487.055(4) states that offenders on parole (Dangerous Offenders, serial killers and repeat sex offenders) shall be summoned to appear at a designated place to provide a sample. It would make more sense to simply detain the parolee and take the sample. The same logic applies to the scenario above. If an offender on parole receives a summons to appear to give a DNA sample and is responsible for more crimes than the authorities know about, he may flee. Recommendation #4 - That s.487.055(4) be amended to allow for simple detention of the parolee for the purposes of taking a sample. 5. Prosecutorial exemption – Section 487.053(a) states a prosecutor can determine that a DNA profile is not necessary. We have concerns that this may be used during plea bargaining negotiations. Recommendation #5 - That s.487.053(a) be repealed. APPENDIX C DNA (dn-) n. A nucleic acid that carries the genetic information in the cell and is capable of self-replication and synthesis of RNA. DNA consists of two long chains of nucleotides twisted into a double helix and joined by hydrogen bonds between the complementary bases adenine and thymine or cytosine and guanine. The sequence of nucleotides determines individual hereditary characteristics. [d(eoxyribo)n(ucleic) a(cid).] fo·ren·sic (f-rnsk, -zk) adj. 1.Relating to, used in, or appropriate for courts of law or for public discussion or argumentation. 2.Of, relating to, or used in debate or argument; rhetorical. 3.Relating to the use of science or technology in the investigation and establishment of facts or evidence in a court of law: a forensic laboratory. [From Latin fornsis, public, of a forum, from forum, forum. See dhwer- in Indo-European Roots.] fo·rensi·cal·ly adv. da·ta·base (dt-bs, dt-) Computer Science n. also data base A collection of data arranged for ease and speed of search and retrieval. Also called data bank. tr.v. da·ta·based, da·ta·bas·ing, da·ta·bas·es To put (data) into a database. dis·crim·i·na·tion (d-skrm-nshn) n. 1.The act of discriminating. 2.The ability or power to see or make fine distinctions; discernment. 3.Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice: racial discrimination; discrimination against foreigners. dis·crimi·nation·al adj. Na·zi (näts, nt-) n. pl. Na·zis 1.A member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party, founded in Germany in 1919 and brought to power in 1933 under Adolf Hitler. 2.often nazi An adherent or advocate of policies characteristic of Nazism; a fascist. adj. Of, relating to, controlled by, or typical of the National Socialist German Workers' Party. [German, short for Nationalsozialistische deutsche Arbeiter-Partei, National Socialist German Workers' Party.] Nazi·fi·cation (-s-f-kshn) n. Nazi·fy (-s-f) v. Nazi adj 1: relating to or consistent with or typical of the ideology and practice of Nazism or the Nazis; "the total Nazi crime"; "the Nazi interpretation of history" [syn: Nazi] 2: relating to a form of socialism; "the national socialist party came to power in 1933" [syn: national socialist, Nazi] n : a German member of Adolf Hitler's political party [syn: Nazi]