“디엔에이신원확인정보 이용 및 보호에 관한 법률”의 문제점과 대안

On the Use of DNA Databases for Forensics

Today DNA databases are used to identify, track, catalogue, apprehend, and prosecute the perpetrators of crimes. The government initialized the regulation on DNA Databases Law to help law enforcement agencies exchange DNA profiles found at crime scenes to identify serious perpetrators and to solve cold crimes. As of July 2010, Korean law enforcement agencies have large forensic DNA database for practical use and adaptation of offender DNA profiles and forensic profiles. Under the law, prosecutor and police can demand to collect DNA forensic samples from individual arrestees for 11 types of crime, e.g. murder, armed robbery, rape, sexual assault against children, drug use, kidnapping and extortion. By passing DNA legislation, law enforcement officials can arrest criminals sooner, prevent crimes, save more lives and use DNA to its potential. The largest DNA database is in the United States of America and the second largest one is in the United Kingdom. The state of California has more than 1.2 million offender California DNA profiles making it the third-largest DNA database in the world. Now forensics is a centralized source to prevent and defeat crimes due to the latest developments concerning DNA databases. DNA Forensics will be using to take DNA of arrestees, (people arrested for a crime but not yet convicted) and prison inmates who have been sentenced. It is still controversial technique of familial searches, where the DNA profile of a suspect is run deliberately through the DNA database in the anticipation that it will be probably matched with the DNA of the suspect’s family member. Furthermore, DNA Forensics provides forensic information clearing houses with leading forensic professionals and law enforcement. It is good to use forensic data and information, but according to some researches and critics, it is also risky to believe those evidences as it is without allowing counter-possibilities. The disputes pop up in the perspective on the constitutionality of these rules. Especially the right to privacy would be harmed in the future.