Last Thursday the police finally began to collect DNA samples from Israel's prisoners. The legislative procedure Tzachi Hanegbi tried to expedite back in 2004, when he served as justice minister, began in 1996, but ended only a year ago.
The debate over what constitutes a reasonable violation of privacy in view of the benefits of such a databank led to the changes in the law. The concern for the right to privacy of innocent citizens did not pay off, and the laches [undue delay] in setting up the DNA databank contributed mainly to preserving the privacy of criminals.
A large, orderly DNA databank that will make it possible to catch criminals and prevent the conviction of innocent people is an urgent and vital necessity. A DNA databank is an excellent tool for preventing rapes. Sex offenders usually repeat their crime again and again, and leave a clear DNA sample. The courts ascribe a high degree of credibility to genetic matches, in view of the vast experience that has amassed in this field throughout the world. The chance of a rapist going free in the event of a DNA match is minuscule. Considering the fact that when it comes to sex crimes, the judge is usually called on to choose between the victim's version and that of the accused, a DNA sample is a prime component in a conviction.
Advertisement
For fear of creating an excessively large databank, the Knesset decided to permit the collection of samples from convicted individuals only. The police wanted permission to store DNA samples from suspects, the accused and convicted, but did not get their way. Under the existing law, the police are allowed to take a sample from a suspect, but only for the purpose of investigating the specific crime of which he or she is suspected. The genetic information can be entered into the databank only after a conviction. On the other hand, it does not have to be destroyed immediately.
The lack of logic in this legal restriction was demonstrated just recently, when the police solved several older rape cases thanks to the DNA obtained from a murder suspect, even though the police were legally barred from putting that information to such use. The judges decided to accept the evidence because of the severity of the crimes. Perhaps that decision provides an opening for amending the law in the spirit of the ruling.
The fear that too much personal information will come into the hands of the state authorities is very understandable, but from the moment DNA samples became a reliable scientific tool, it becomes impossible to forgo their use without causing horrific injustice to potential crime victims.
DNA samples can be particularly helpful in cases of serial offenders. This applies not only to sex offenders, but also to violent criminals who rob or murder the elderly. It makes no sense to take a DNA sample from a suspect without keeping it in a permanent databank to convict him, to prevent further crimes, and to exonerate anyone who is wrongfully accused.
DNA tests have already helped free dozens of people in America who came close to being executed, and in Canada dozens of prisoners were released after serving decades because of wrongful convictions. This is why the benefit to the public and the individual in maintaining a large DNA databank for the purpose of criminal investigations defeats every counterargument regarding violation of privacy.
Haaretz.com, the online edition of Haaretz Newspaper in Israel, offers real-time breaking news, opinions and analysis from Israel and the Middle East. Haaretz.com provides extensive and in-depth coverage of Israel, the Jewish World and the Middle East, including defense, diplomacy, the Arab-Israeli conflict, the peace process, Israeli politics, Jerusalem affairs, international relations, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the Israeli business world and Jewish life in Israel and the Diaspora.
