Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

It is a fan of oratory.

In some cases, forensic evidence also can be crucial to avoiding wrongful conviction while the true culprit evades justice. The use of forensic science to solve criminal cases is growing globally. A multidisciplinary field that embraces chemistry, physics, botany, zoology and medicine, forensic science includes the identification of human bodies or traces. Traditional methods such as fingerprinting and trace analyses are still used with the assistance of computers. In addition, forensic dentistry, voice and speech spectrograms, blood analysis and DNA analysis are increasingly applied. A wide range of powers and procedures are now available to enable the Garda and indeed the PSNI to take, compare and retain crime scene evidence, including photographs, fingerprints, footwear impressions and objects including suspected weapons or parts thereof, as well as the taking of intimate samples for evidentiary comparison.

Sinn Féin acknowledges the need for collection and analysis of forensic evidence. However my party is also aware that forensic science is constantly evolving and the degree of its accuracy is a continual matter of debate among experts. For example, in 2009 a debate emerged among forensic scientists on whether a certain type of internal bleeding seen in infant deaths can only be caused by the shaking of a baby, which finding generally results in a murder conviction. Closer to home, in 2007 Sean Hoey was acquitted in the Omagh bombing case as a consequence of the judge’s rejection of the validity of the low copy number, LCN, DNA profiling technique that has been used in more than 21,000 serious crime cases in the British jurisdiction and internationally, particularly in cold cases. These are two of many situations in which the use of forensic science is at the very least uncertain and potentially could lead to perversion of justice. Sinn Féin therefore believes that ongoing research is needed in a variety of areas where forensic methods and definitions, both newly emergent and established, are being used in court for the prosecution of persons.

Notwithstanding the above, most methods of forensic evidence gathering are accepted by Sinn Féin as being generally relevant and necessary methods of criminal investigation where applied to the appropriate standard by trained personnel and under appropriate supervision and monitoring. While I welcome the main thrust of this Bill, Sinn Féin has several concerns it would like to raise and on which it may seek to include amendments. At the core of this debate, one must remember that any prejudice to the presumption of innocence must be eliminated. One cannot move to a position in which people without criminal records are being treated as potential suspects for future crimes. One of my main objections to this Bill relates to its providing for the taking of samples such as mouth swabs or hair follicles from some former offenders who no longer are subject to sentence. This is stated in section 33 of the Bill, where it states that a sample may be taken from a former offender.

I ask the Minister to clarify at a later stage whether that means this Bill will not have due regard for the Good Friday and Weston Park agreements. Is it compliant with these agreements because, initially, this seems contrary to the workings thereof? A concern would arise in respect of the retention of anything related to former political prisoners released under the Good Friday Agreement. The ICCL has highlighted another concern in the form of international co-operation, specifically concerning how samples or DNA profiles generated from such samples or both may be transmitted to other states, including outside the European Union. Again, I call on the Minister for clarification. Will the role of the proposed DNA database system oversight committee extend to reviewing the appropriateness of the date protection safeguards in place in states to which samples or profiles may be transmitted? I agree wholeheartedly with the ICCL that as a matter of principle, profiles or samples should never be transmitted to states that cannot guarantee they will protected by appropriate privacy safeguards. I also ask the Minister the reason this Bill was never submitted to the Irish Human Rights Commission for its consideration.

See this speech in context