Children's DNA will be retained for three years if they have committed certain violent or sexual offences - even if they have been dealt with through the hearings system, ministers announced yesterday.
Children's DNA will be retained for three years if they have committed certain violent or sexual offences - even if they have been dealt with through the hearings system, ministers announced yesterday.
Police will also be able to hold the fingerprint data of adults prosecuted for, but not subsequently convicted of, violent or sexual offences under the plans.
Kenny MacAskill, the Justice Secretary, revealed that the Scottish Government plans to enhance police powers, establish a working group to review the operation of existing and future databases and decide which offences committed by children would result in their DNA being retained.
Under the reforms, chief constables can apply to sheriffs for an extension on a two-yearly basis to keep children's DNA but indefinite retention will only be allowed where there is a conviction.
The move follows the government commissioned-review of DNA retention by Professor Jim Fraser of Strathclyde University. The proposals were attacked by children's groups.
Scotland has consistently rejected proposals to create an English-style national DNA database containing any non-convicted samples but the system will now include more children and will be put on a statutory footing.
Mr Fraser concluded that DNA samples belonging to children who commit serious sexual and violent offences, but who go before a children's panel, should be kept by the police.
Police are currently allowed to store only the DNA of children who are convicted of violent or sex crimes in an adult court. There are already more than 4000 children on the Scottish database.
Police forces in England and Wales are believed to have kept the DNA of more than 100,000 innocent children.
John Scott, a human rights lawyer, said the offences would have to be very tightly defined and safeguarded.
"We have to be very careful to allow for the reform and maturation of children and avoid branding or labelling them," he said.
Bill Aitken MSP, Tory justice spokesman, said: "As Mr MacAskill himself realises, this is a delicate question of balance.
"We would be minded to support these plans but there would have to be safeguards and certainly we could not accept DNA being retained in cases other than when the person or child has not been convicted of a violent or sexual offence."
The Scottish Government is also considering the retention of forensic data taken from individuals who accept direct measures, such as fines and compensation orders.
The Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland (Acpos) and the Scottish Police Services Authority also called for the retention of forensic data taken from individuals who subsequently accept a police fixed penalty notice.
Mr MacAskill said: "The development of forensic technology has significantly enhanced the powers of our police to detect and prevent crime.
"We are determined to ensure that the police and their law enforcement partners are equipped to provide the best evidence to bring the guilty to justice. But we must also ensure the rights of the innocent are protected.
"We believe the only circumstances in which the state should have powers to keep DNA or fingerprint evidence indefinitely is where it has been taken from a convicted criminal.
"Our unique and celebrated welfare-based Children's Hearings System deals with child offending in a way that aims to turn children away from a future path of criminality and protects them from the public spectacle of court prosecutions. That is right.
"However, in a small number of cases where a young person within the Hearings System admits or is found to have committed a serious violent or sexual offence which may indicate a future risk of harm to themselves or others - and in particular to other children - we believe the forensic evidence should be retained for a limited period."
Assistant Chief Constable Jim Stephen of Grampian Police, spokesman on forensic science for the Acpos, said: "Acpos believes there are potential advantages to public protection and benefits to the Scottish Police Service by taking DNA samples and fingerprints and to the retention of same in certain circumstances.
"These advantages include: being able to match additional crime scene stains to potential offenders; processing effective identification of suspects; increasing the number and speed of detections; and, saving taxpayer funding through more efficient investigations."
A spokesperson for the Scottish Children's Reporter Administration (SCRA) said: "SCRA looks forward to working with the Scottish Government's expert working group which will progress the proposals in relation to the small number of young people within the Children's Hearings System who admit, or are found by a Sheriff, to have committed a serious violent or sexual offence."
Tom Roberts, head of public affairs at Children 1st, said: "We believe it is not appropriate or necessary to retain children's DNA. This is because children should be treated as children first and foremost.
"It is not appropriate for a child to be faced with formal criminal consequences, particularly when their offence has been dealt with within the welfare-based Children's Hearings system."
