plans for the police to keep innocent people's DNA profiles for up to 12 years will become law without a Commons vote.

Fury as Commons Denied DNA Vote

'Jacqui Smith, the home 

secretary, has been warned that 

the government risks further 

damaging the public's faith in 

politics after it emerged that 

plans for the police to keep 

innocent people's DNA 

profiles for up to 12 years 

will 

become law without a 

Commons vote. Opposition 

parties and civil liberty groups 

united to condemn plans that 

are 

being steered through 

parliament while MPs are 

distracted by the expenses row.'

Read below

Fury as Commons denied DNA vote

Home secretary bids to bypass Commons vote on database

• Buzz up!
• Digg it

• Jamie Doward, home affairs editor
• The Observer, Sunday 24 May 2009
• Article history

Jacqui Smith, the home secretary, has been warned that the government risks further damaging the public's faith in politics after it emerged that plans for the police to keep innocent people's DNA profiles for up to 12 years will become law without a Commons vote.

Opposition parties and civil liberty groups united to condemn plans that are being steered through parliament while MPs are distracted by the expenses row.

The Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats claim the government is seeking to make controversial changes to the national DNA database via a "statutory instrument" because it fears losing a vote that would be required if they were introduced by the more conventional method of primary legislation.

A statutory instrument has to be discussed only by a specialist committee which meets for 90 minutes and is usually made up of 16 MPs and a chairman. Critics say the Labour MPs who will dominate the committee will be handpicked by government whips and therefore back the Home Office proposals.

"It is not good enough for ministers to circumnavigate parliamentary process just because they are running scared of another defeat," said Chris Huhne, the Lib Dems' home affairs spokesman. "With this administration's history of legislative diarrhoea, there should be room for the discussion of something so important on the floor of the House."

Under the government's proposals, the DNA profiles of those arrested for minor crimes and offences but not charged or found guilty will be held for six years before being destroyed. Those arrested for murder and rape but not convicted will stay on record for 12 years.

The government is being forced to destroy the profiles of some 800,000 innocent people held on the database following a European Court of Human Rights ruling. Judges in Strasbourg said the government's retention of innocent people's DNA was disproportionate.

While the government has signalled it accepts the ruling, its proposal to allow the police to hold profiles for years has provoked widespread criticism. Last night the home secretary was warned that the government risks further anger over the way it intends to make the proposals law.

"The public might expect the length of time innocent people's intimate details are kept would warrant lengthy parliamentary debate," said Anita Coles, of the civil rights group Liberty. "Yet the home secretary wants regulations that will be rushed through in 90 minutes. Is this a good way to rebuild faith in politics?"

In an interview in today's Observer, the inventor of DNA fingerprinting, Sir Alec Jeffreys, warns that the government's commitment to keeping innocent people's profiles has created intense grievance throughout the country.

"Some people are seriously distressed," Jeffreys says. "They feel they are being branded as criminals when they are innocent. This is compromising the use of DNA profiles. Certainly if I was asked now to give a blood sample to help solve a crime I would have serious doubts about supplying it."

The Home Office says it needs to use a statutory instrument to comply with the court ruling as quickly as possible. It has launched a "full public consultation" on the proposals and is seeking the views of expert groups such as the police.

A spokesman said: "The findings from the consultation will help form the contents of the regulations which will then be put before parliament for debate and approval."