Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
of total samples on the database the USA has now by far the largest criminal
database.
European databases
In mainland Europe, many countries have established DNA databases [18]. The
Netherlands and Austria established their version of a DNA database in 1997, with
Germany following 1 year later and Finland and Norway in 1999 [19]. Since the
introduction of DNA databases in many European countries, the legislation governing
the collection and retention of samples has also altered to facilitate the addition
of samples onto the database and the circumstances in which the database can be
searched: for example, in Germany, a judge is no longer required to sanction DNA
typing of crime scene samples. Following the treaty of Pr um, there is increasing
cooperation on sharing data between European countries.
Australian and New Zealand databases
New Zealand implemented a DNA database in 1996 along similar lines to that of the
UK. The population is significantly smaller, but as a percentage of the population
New Zealand is second only to the UK in terms of the number of DNA profiles held
on its database. This is reflected in the fact that 63% of profiles loaded from crime
scenes result in a match to an individual on the database. Australia was also rapid in
developing DNA databases, although, in the first instance, as Australia is a federal
country with six states and two territories, each state required to make an agreement
with the other five states to allow the transmission of data between them, resulting
in 49 separate pieces of legislation.
Cross-border databases
Criminals tend to operate in their own country but there are circumstances when
crimes will be committed in more than one country. In order for criminal databases
to be effective in these circumstances there is a need to share data. Interpol has been
instrumental in facilitating cross-border comparisons of DNA profiles. The STR loci
commonly used in the forensic community were combined to make the Interpol
Standard Set of Loci (ISSOL); recommendations have been made to expand it from
7 to 10 loci [20]. In Europe the EU Council resolution 9192/01 calls upon European
countries to use the European Standard Set (ESS), which are the same as the Interpol
loci, as a minimum to enable international comparison of DNA profiles; the loci have
been selected through the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSIs)
(Table 10.1).
The biggest obstacle to cross-border data sharing is now political rather than
technical; developments like the treaty of Prum have lead to increased sharing of
data across borders and this is likely to continue.
