Open Access Research Article
FORENSIC USE OF DNA INFORMATION : ETHICS, PRIVACY AND OTHER CHALLENGES
Published Paper
Article Details
FORENSIC
USE OF DNA INFORMATION : ETHICS, PRIVACY AND OTHER CHALLENGES
Authored by
- AKSHITA.B.N
& R. S. PRAKASH RAJA
ABSTRACT:
DNA profiling came into use around
three decades ago in the late 1980s. The development in technology has brought
many methods to identify and solve crimes, one such method is DNA phenotyping.
The accuracy in phenotyping violates the ethics and privacy of an individual.
In a populated country like India there is a huge requirement of DNA databases
and the DNA profiling Bill 2019 establishes a national data bank and regional
data banks. The bill proposes a written consent by individuals for collection
of DNA samples and provides the removal of DNA profiles and after receiving the
order of the court. This Bill can be criticised as it is a technique that
breaches an individuals privacy. The bill also has a big loophole as it doesn’t
mention the methods of collecting data and what type of DNA must be collected.
The DNA Bill fails to mention that phenotyping of an individual must be
restricted. In spite of the necessity for speedy trials in India there arises
the question of ethical collection of data and violation of privacy of an
individual due to such data banks. The bill has also erred in allowing usage of
DNA data for Settlement of civil matters such as surrogacy, maternity, Organ
transplantation and immigration. The objective of this paper is to identify whether
the privacy of an individual is not violated as guaranteed by the DNA Bill 2019
And if the DNA bill follows the international guidelines for collecting and
removing the DNA information of an individual. Convenient sampling method is
used to collect the samples. 200 samples-sample size. Independent variables are
age, gender, education and occupation. It is found that there is a need for a
proper DNA database as phenotyping can be highly misused and target minorities
or an innocent individual. Finally, this paper analyses, suggests and concludes
that India can also establish a DNA data bank like the Netherlands, Germany,
France and Austria where they allow DNA profiling only for serious criminal
cases as under such circumstances there is a least chance of any misuse.
KEYWORDS: DNA
Bill 2019, Ethics, Privacy, Phenotyping, Violation.
INTRODUCTION:
The DNA of an individual is unique in
itself and it varies from One another. DNA profiling and fingerprinting came
into use around three decades ago, in the late 1980s and the first case was in
a village in the UK. India recognised DNA as evidence in the year 1985. In a
criminal trial DNA is one of the common forms of evidence and there are many
countries that have specific laws for DNA databases and it is also used for
civil cases in a lot of countries like China, Europe and The States. Till now
there are no specific laws that can provide guidelines about the DNA storage
and the type of DNA that can be stored. Privacy guaranteed under Article 21 of
the Indian Constitution is violated and lack of ethical collection of data
makes the country very vulnerable to misuse of DNA samples and profiles. In Ram Jethmalani v. Union of India[1] The
Supreme Court held that the right to privacy is an integral part of the right
to life and it is important that human beings are allowed to be domains of
Freedom that are free of public scrutiny unless they act in an unlawful manner.
It is the responsibility of the state to uphold the fundamental rights of every
individual. The DNA database in the USA was developed by the FBI as CODIS. The
US Supreme Court in the case of Maryland
v. King[2]
stated that when the offices make an arrest for serious offences they are
authorised to take DNA samples from the accused by the way of collecting cheek
swabs and the same can be legitimately used as evidence in the court of law. In
Europe the criminal justice system has recognised DNA database collection and
the police to an extent is permitted to take the DNA of the arrested person
before the investigation process begins so that the process is faster. The DNA
database is helpful in old unsolved crimes; it can be useful for speedy trials.
Do the storage of DNA is useful, it has a direct violation of privacy and is
unethical as the DNA bill fails to establish what type of DNA can be collected
and how it can be stored and for what kind of cases such data can be used.
Direct phenotyping can identify the appearance, eye colour, Iris, hair, height,
weight, ancestral lineage and other numerous external factors of an individual
and this model is accurate up to 95%. Indirect phenotyping identifies the geographical
or ethnic origin of an individual. Though the phenotyping reduces the suspect
list there is a concern that this tool has the risk of perpetrating racial
prejudices. There is a possibility that biased law officials may misuse DNA
information of an unknown suspects race and might involve minorities. As new
forensic applications for DNA evidence are being discovered some of the
techniques race complex ethical and legal issues. There are a few jurisdictions
that prohibit forensic DNA phenotyping. US states, Belgium, Germany, Europe
have successfully developed their DNA database and have ensured to harmonise
ethical and legal issues of collection of DNA samples. The aim of this paper is to identify the ethical and legal issues
concerning collection of DNA samples.
OBJECTIVES:
? To find the advantages of a national
DNA database and to analyse the phenotype usage of DNA.
? To identify the misuse of phenotype
use of DNA in identifying the Iris Colour, Hair Colour, race, family lineage
etc. of the individual.
? To find the ethical challenges in
using Forensic DNA information.
? To identify the effectiveness ensured
by DNA databank for protecting individuals' privacy.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE:
(Bonomi et al., 2020)
found that traditional privacy models designed for health data provide
limited protection for genomic data. An attacker learns sensitive information
about the target and accesses data like: family name, demographic data, the
eyes, iris, Hair colour etc about a person. (Kumar, 2020) found that DNA polymorphism is useful for
assisting the policemen with information on who might have been there at the
crime scene. Forensic DNA databases are currently in 69 countries
(approximately). Such databases are necessary in India as there are a lot of
pending cases and lack of speedy trials. (Bradbury et al., 2019) found that recent advances in DNA
sequencing technologies have become more feasible and cost-effective to
genotype Larger market sets for forensic purposes. (Sero et al., 2019) found a new
aspect of 3D facial phenotype DNA. Using it the researchers find 3D points
comprising each facial segment and use principal component analysis. The
authors also state that The storage and computational capabilities of biometric
storage will improve. (Ibrahim &
Ali, 2017) used
the educational variable and have found that respondents do not feel safe about
their privacy with the DNA bill and 40 percentage of the respondents have
questioned the efficiency of such storage. (Kumar et al., 2016) found that in a populated country like India, there
is a huge requirement for DNA databases which may help in stopping different
types of fraud. The major motive to provide a DNA database is to investigate
and find leads to solve a crime. (Kayser, 2015) Identifies that forensic DNA phenotyping refers to the
prediction of appearance traits of unknown sample donors or unknown deceased
(missing) persons, directly from biomaterials found at the crime scene. (MacLean & Lamparello, n.d.) (2015)
Phenotyping estimates the extremely visible characteristics of the source of
human DNA left at the crime scene. It is approached for hundred percent
accuracy of hair, iris, height and 3-D facial recognition of an individual that
is available from the samples left from the crime scene. (Wallace et al., 2014) find the major issue of the public
on data collection of DNA. They include: unfairness, tracking Individuals or
groups of people or their family, misuse of data by corrupt police officers,
possibility of being falsely accused of the crime and so the study has found a
number of areas that require exploration so they include conditions on DNA to
be stored, length of storage, The type of security to be used for storage etc. (Walsh et al., 2014) Found that rigorous testing of blood samples
(DNA) that Is hair semen et cetera Such phenotyping matches 88 percent of the
cases and the Eye, Gait, Iris etc. Traits of an individual can be easily
identified. (Schadt et al.,
2010) Identify that
they (USA) Can generate hundreds of gigabases Of DNA and RNA sequencing data in
a week for less than US$5000. The rate of data is low cost and the storage is
allowing individual labs to even access At a reasonable rate. The major issue
with such accessibility is that such confidential data sold at low-cost would
lead to the misuse and again there will be the question of ethics and privacy
of an individual being violated. (Curtis, 2009) has identified that some tribal
groups must be treated with cultural respect as individuals of such tribes
cannot give blood samples without the consent of the whole group. The ethnicity
issues must be addressed as the group feels non-have rights to access their
genetic information. (Kayser &
Schneider, 2009)
has a major objective of proving the forensics motivations for DNA based
predictions of human externally visible traits as well as the scientific
challenges of finding DNA makers does not lead to violation of privacy. (Stajano et al., 2008) compare and find that the adoption
of DNA in forensic context grows rapidly in some countries (notably UK) and is
building a very large DNA database. The storage privacy and ethics of such
databases were questioned as it is still an unsolved issue. (Cho & Sankar, 2004) find the importance of data on human
genetic variation and how it is crucial to prove a crime, at the same time it
affects the ethics, privacy of an individual as the data is poorly classified
in the country and they are labelling people according to their race,
community, caste etc.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
The current study is based on
empirical research. It is consisting of the scientific frame of research. It
began with the finding of research problems based on the review of literature.
The major contribution of the study is to collect the legal facts of a
particular area and to test the hypothesis of a cause and effect relationship
between variables. The research design is exploratory and experimental. It
explored the problem tested with hypotheses and provided the solution from the
analysis. Convenient sampling method is used (Non probability sampling). The sample size is 200. Data is collected
through online sources. Questionnaire
is used as the primary data collection and the articles, journals, reports,
newsletters are considered as the secondary sources. The analysis is carried
out for demographic statistics (Age, Gender, Educational qualification and
Occupation) and hypothesis testing graphs are used.
ANALYSIS:
VARIABLES:
Age:
FIG. 1
LEGEND: From fig.
1 it’s observed that, majority of the respondents are from the age group 31-40
with 36.5%, 11.5% of above 50, 31.5% of the age group 18-30 and 20.5% of the
age group 41-50.
Gender:
FIG. 2
LEGEND: From
fig. 2 it’s observed that 50% of the respondents are men and 50% are women.
Education:
FIG. 3
LEGEND: From
fig. 3 it’s observed that, majority of the respondents have completed their UG
or persuading their UG with 67%. 28.5% respondents have completed their PG, 5%
completed HSC and 3% have completed SSLC.
Occupation:
FIG.4
LEGEND: From
fig. 4 it’s observed that 66.5% (majority of the respondents) are private
employees, 23.5% are self employed, 9% are unemployed and a mere 1% of the
respondent is a government employee.
QUESTIONS:
- DNA REGULATION BILL 2019 IS VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
AND CAN COMPRISE PRIVACY OF INDIVIDUALS.
FIG. 5
LEGEND: From
Fig.5 it’s observed that the majority of the respondents agree to the violation
of human rights and compromise of privacy of individuals by the DNA bill 2019.
RESULT: The
results of Fig.5 proves that the privacy violation of the DNA Bill 2019 is a
serious issue as it does not include the word phenotype and it can lead to
misuse of privacy of an individual as the phenotype can predict the hair
colour, iris colour and can also predict the ancestors of a person. It is also
considered to be dangerous because this method can be used to over power the
minorities.
DISCUSSION:
From the above results it’s observed
that respondents from the age group 18 to 30 from every educational
qualification including the no-formal education are highly aware of the privacy
issues and the human right violations in the new DNA regulation Bill 2019. The
age group of 31 to 40 do not have any great differences, they all have a neutral
opinion on the violation of privacy. From the above image it can be interpreted
that the age groups 41 to 50 and above 50 are unaware of their privacy
violations by the DNA Bill 2019 and the special observation is on the age group
of above 50 from no formal education as they do not agree to the privacy
violation of the DNA Bill 2019.
FIG. 6
LEGEND: From
Fig.6 it’s observed that the majority of the respondents agree to the violation
of human rights and compromise of privacy of individuals by the DNA bill 2019.
RESULT: The
results of Fig.6 proves that the privacy violation of the DNA Bill 2019 is a
serious issue as it does not include the word phenotype and it can lead to
misuse of privacy of an individual.
DISCUSSION:
From the above results it’s observed
that Men from private companies and women from private companies or private
jobs agree to the privacy violation done by the DNA Bill 2019. There are only
women respondents from the government occupation who have a neutral opinion on
the violation of their privacy. Self employed men also have neutral opinions On
the topic and self employed women are aware about their privacy violations
unemployed women also have neutral opinion on the DNA violation. The special
observation to be made is that men who are unemployed or highly aware of their
privacy violations due to the DNA Bill 2019.
- INDIVIDUAL PRIVACY IS ENSURED AS THE CUSTODIAN OF THE DATABANK WILL NOT
RELEASE ANY INFORMATION WITHOUT A FORMAL REQUEST.
FIG. 7
LEGEND: From
Fig.7 it’s observed that the majority of the respondents disagree or neutralize
their responses to the question of safety of DNA information of individuals.
RESULT: The
results of Fig.7 proves that the privacy violation of the DNA Bill 2019 is a
serious issue as it questions the security and maintenance of the DNA storage.
DISCUSSION:
From the above results it’s observed
that the respondents from the age group 18 to 30 agree that the information
stored with the DNA database would be safe and secure and the respondents from
the age group 31 to 40 of all educational qualifications also have a neutral
opinion on it. The special observation over here is to be given to the age
group of 50 and above from the educational qualification that is the category
of new formal education as they highly disagree that the information that is
the DNA information stored in the DNA database is violative of individual’s
privacy and can be highly misused.
FIG.8
LEGEND: From
Fig.8 it’s observed that the majority of the respondents agree to the question
of safety of DNA information of individuals.
RESULT: The
results of Fig.8 proves that the privacy violation of the DNA Bill 2019 is a
serious issue as it questions the security and maintenance of the DNA storage.
DISCUSSION:
From the above results it’s observed
that men Who are private employees highly agree to the question of violation of
privacy and the DNA Bill releasing data unnecessarily and the women from the
private institutions have a neutral opinion on the question. The women who are
government employees also have a neutral opinion. The self employed men
disagree with the privacy violation and hear the self employed women also have
neutral opinions. The special observation to be made here is that men who are
unemployed or highly aware that their individual privacy is being violated by
the national data bank even the women who are unemployed agree that the privacy
is being violated.
- IS IT ETHICAL TO HAVE A NATIONAL DNA DATABASE?
FIG.9
LEGEND:
From Fig.9 it’s observed that the
majority of the respondents disagree about the ethics of collecting the DNA.
RESULT:
From the results it’s observed that
the ethics of collecting the DNA And having a database for it has been
questioned. In China the DNA of individuals have been collected and this video
is a very big loophole to target the minorities and therefore it is very
harmful.
DISCUSSION:
The effects of having a DNA database
has been questioned and there are 70% of respondents who disagree that it is
ethical to have a DNA database and 30% of the respondents agree that it is
ethical to have a DNA database.
Tables:
TABLE 1:
H0: There is no significant
association between educational qualification and the privacy and human rights
of individuals.
Ha: There is a significant
association between educational qualification and the privacy and human rights
of individuals.
|
1. "DNA regulation Bill 2019 is a violation of human
rights as it harms privacy of individuals."
|
|||||
|
|
Frequency
|
Percent
|
Valid Percent
|
Cumulative Percent
|
|
|
Valid
|
Illiterate
|
3
|
1.5
|
1.5
|
1.5
|
|
SSLC
|
53
|
26.5
|
26.5
|
28.0
|
|
|
HSC
|
27
|
13.5
|
13.5
|
41.5
|
|
|
UG
|
62
|
31.0
|
31.0
|
72.5
|
|
|
PG
|
55
|
27.5
|
27.5
|
100.0
|
|
|
Total
|
200
|
100.0
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
Chi-Square Tests
|
|||
|
|
Value
|
df
|
Asymptotic Significance
(2-sided)
|
|
Pearson Chi-Square
|
124.522a
|
16
|
.000
|
|
Likelihood Ratio
|
131.172
|
16
|
.000
|
|
Linear-by-Linear
Association
|
12.277
|
1
|
.000
|
|
N of Valid Cases
|
200
|
|
|
|
a. 0 cells (0.0%) have
expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 30.45.
|
|||
DISCUSSION:
The
value of the test statistic is 124.522. Because the test statistic is based on
a 5x5 cross tabulation table, the degrees of freedom (df) for the test
statistic is df=(R?1) ?(C?1) = (5?1) ? (5?1) =4?4=16.
The corresponding p-value of the test statistic is p <0.05. Since the
p-value is smaller than our chosen significance level (? < 0.05), the null
hypothesis is rejected. Rather, we conclude that there is enough evidence to
suggest an association between education and how education plays a major role
to determine the question of privacy issues related to the DNA Bill. It can be
inferred from the results that there is an association between education
and how education influences the
awareness level (?2 (8)> = 124.522, p < 0.05). Amongst the different
education levels, those who have completed their masters degree (PG), agree
more with the statement that DNA regulation Bill 2019 is a violation of human
rights as it harms privacy of individuals.
TABLE 2:
H0: There is no significant
association between educational qualification and agreeability on safety and
security of the DNA data.
Ha: There is a significant
association between educational qualification and agreeability on safety and
security of the DNA data.
|
2. "Individual privacy is ensured as the custodian of
the databank will not release any information without any formal
requisition"
|
|||||
|
|
Frequency
|
Percent
|
Valid Percent
|
Cumulative Percent
|
|
|
Valid
|
Illiterate
|
26
|
13.0
|
13.0
|
13.0
|
|
SSLC
|
46
|
23.0
|
23.0
|
36.0
|
|
|
HSC
|
54
|
27.0
|
27.0
|
63.0
|
|
|
UG
|
41
|
20.5
|
20.5
|
83.5
|
|
|
PG
|
33
|
16.5
|
16.5
|
100.0
|
|
|
Total
|
200
|
100.0
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
Chi-Square Tests
|
|||
|
|
Value
|
df
|
Asymptotic Significance
(2-sided)
|
|
Pearson Chi-Square
|
95.454a
|
16
|
.049
|
|
Likelihood Ratio
|
94.515
|
16
|
.049
|
|
Linear-by-Linear
Association
|
28.662
|
1
|
.091
|
|
N of Valid Cases
|
1348
|
|
|
|
a. 0 cells (0.0%) have
expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 64.12.
|
|||
DISCUSSION:
The
value of the test statistic is 95.454. Because the test statistic is based on a
5x5 cross tabulation table, the degrees of freedom (df) for the test statistic
is df=(R?1) ?(C?1) = (5?1) ? (5?1) =4?4=16.
The corresponding p-value of the test statistic is p <0.05. Since the
p-value is smaller than our chosen significance level (? < 0.05), the null
hypothesis is rejected. Rather, we conclude that there is enough evidence to
suggest an association between education and how education plays a major role
to determine the agreeability on safety of DNA data. It can be inferred from
the results that there is an association between education and how education influences the agreeability
level (?2 (8)> = 124.522, p <
0.05). Amongst the different education levels, those who have completed their
bachelors degree agree more with the statement.
LIMITATION:
The Major
limitation of the study is the sample frame. The sample frame Collected through
online platforms like sending mail, sending links via WhatsApp is the limitation
of the study, the real field experience is missed out due to corona pandemic.
The restrictive area of sample size is yet another drawback of the research.
Collection of data via online platforms is limiting the researcher to collect
data from the field. Since the data is collected on an online platform wherein
the respondent is not known, the original opinion of the respondent is not
found, this research could only come to an approximate conclusion of what the
respondent is feeling to convey.
SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSION:
DNA phenotyping or molecular photo
fitting is primarily used to predict a person's physical appearance and
ancestry. DNA technology has been used across the world to solve crimes and
helps to identify individuals. It would also help in an investigation relating
to victims of natural disasters such as cyclones, tsunamis or those who died in
an air crash or train accident. Even though it can be inferred that DNA
databases can be used for Domestic or civil cases apart from the criminal case,
due to the lack of ethical collection of data it is recommended to use
databases only for the serious criminal cases. The major objective of this
paper is to find the ethical challenges in using forensic DNA information and
how databases violate individuals privacy. It was found that the phenotyping
identifies the race of people and in future it may be misused to target a group
of minorities or to make an innocent guilty of the crime. India first needs
laws to protect privacy and personal data especially after recognising article
21 as a fundamental right. Lack of proper DNA profiling laws coupled with lack
of ethics makes India very vulnerable to misuse DNA samples and profiles.
Though the bill is clear to some extent, it is not clear on the issues of privacy
and consent which is the fundamental right of an individual and it cannot be
ceased.
REFERENCE:
- Bee, C., Chen, Y.-J., Ward, D., Liu, X., Seelig, G., Strauss, K.,
& Ceze, L. (n.d.). Content-Based Similarity Search
in Large-Scale DNA Data Storage Systems.
https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.25.115477
- Bonomi,
L., Huang, Y., & Ohno-Machado, L. (2020). Privacy challenges and
research opportunities for genomic data sharing. In Nature Genetics
(Vol. 52, Issue 7, pp. 646–654). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-020-0651-0
- Bowyer,
K. (2009). Toward the next generation of iris biometrics science. In SPIE Newsroom.
https://doi.org/10.1117/2.1200904.1595
- Bradbury,
C., Köttgen, A., & Staubach, F. (2019). Off-target phenotypes in
forensic DNA phenotyping and biogeographic ancestry inference: A resource.
In Forensic
Science International: Genetics
(Vol. 38, pp. 93–104). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2018.10.010\
- Butler,
J. M. (2015). The future of forensic DNA analysis. Philosophical Transactions of
the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 370(1674).
https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0252
- Cho,
M. K., & Sankar, P. (2004). Forensic genetics and ethical, legal and
social implications beyond the clinic. Nature Genetics, 36(11
Suppl), S8–S12.
- Curtis,
C. (2009). Public Perceptions and Expectations of the Forensic Use of DNA.
In Bulletin
of Science, Technology & Society
(Vol. 29, Issue 4, pp. 313–324). https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467609336306
- Curtis,
C. (2014). Public Understandings of the Forensic Use of DNA. In Bulletin of Science, Technology
& Society (Vol. 34, Issues 1-2, pp. 21–32). https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467614549415
- Ibrahim,
S. F., & Ali, M. M. (2017). Knowledge and Attitude of Medical Students
of Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt About National DNA Database. In International Journal of Medical
Toxicology and Forensic Medicine
(Vol. 7, Issue 3(Summer), pp. 145–150). https://doi.org/10.18869/nirp.ijmtfm.7.3.145
- Kayser,
M. (2015). Forensic DNA Phenotyping: Predicting human appearance from
crime scene material for investigative purposes. Forensic Science International.
Genetics, 18,
33–48.
- Kayser,
M., & Schneider, P. M. (2009). DNA-based prediction of human
externally visible characteristics in forensics: Motivations, scientific
challenges, and ethical considerations. In Forensic Science International:
Genetics (Vol. 3, Issue 3, pp. 154–161). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2009.01.012
- Kumar,
S. (2020). DNA Databases: Risks, Benefits, Privacy, and Human Rights. In Forensic DNA Typing: Principles,
Applications and Advancements
(pp. 659–678). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6655-4_34
- Kumar,
S., Verma, A. K., Singh, P., & Singh, R. (2016). Current scenario of
forensic DNA databases in or outside India and their relative risk. In Egyptian Journal of Forensic
Sciences (Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 1–5). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejfs.2015.03.002
- MacLean,
C. E., & Lamparello, A. (n.d.). Forensic DNA Phenotyping in Criminal
Investigations and Criminal Courts: Assessing and Mitigating the Dilemmas
Inherent in the Science. In SSRN Electronic Journal.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2560157
- McNevin,
D., Wright, K., Chaseling, J., & Barash, M. (2019). Commentary on:
Bright et al. (2018) Internal validation of STRmixTM - a multi laboratory response to PCAST, Forensic
Science International: Genetics, 34: 11-24 [Review of Commentary on: Bright et al.
(2018) Internal validation of STRmixTM - a multi laboratory response
to PCAST, Forensic Science International: Genetics, 34: 11-24]. Forensic Science International.
Genetics, 41,
e14–e17.
- Schadt,
E. E., Linderman, M. D., Sorenson, J., Lee, L., & Nolan, G. P. (2010).
Computational solutions to large-scale data management and analysis. In Nature Reviews Genetics
(Vol. 11, Issue 9, pp. 647–657). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2857
- Sero,
D., Zaidi, A., Li, J., White, J. D., Zarzar, T. B. G., Marazita, M. L.,
Weinberg, S. M., Suetens, P., Vandermeulen, D., Wagner, J. K., Shriver, M.
D., & Claes, P. (2019). Facial recognition from DNA using face-to-DNA
classifiers. Nature
Communications, 10(1),
2557.
- Stajano,
F., Bianchi, L., Liò, P., & Korff, D. (2008). Forensic genomics. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM
workshop on Privacy in the electronic society - WPES ’08.
https://doi.org/10.1145/1456403.1456407
- Wallace,
H. M., Jackson, A. R., Gruber, J., & Thibedeau, A. D. (2014). Forensic
DNA databases–Ethical and legal standards: A global review. In Egyptian Journal of Forensic
Sciences (Vol. 4, Issue 3, pp. 57–63). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejfs.2014.04.002
- Walsh, S., Chaitanya, L., Clarisse, L., Wirken, L., Draus-Barini,
J., Kovatsi, L., Maeda, H., Ishikawa, T., Sijen, T., de Knijff, P.,
Branicki, W., Liu, F., & Kayser, M. (2014). Developmental validation
of the HIrisPlex system: DNA-based eye and hair colour prediction for
forensic and anthropological usage. In Forensic Science International:
Genetics (Vol. 9, pp. 150–161). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2013.12.006
PLAGIARISM
REPORT:
Article Information
FORENSIC USE OF DNA INFORMATION : ETHICS, PRIVACY AND OTHER CHALLENGES
Authors: AKSHITA.B.N, R. S. PRAKASH RAJA
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2023/01/12
- Volume 2
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.