1. Global DNA Databasing Policy: Annual Legislative Update & DNA Interoperability Policy Presented by: Tim Schellberg, President GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL Governmental Affairs Washington, DC (202) 258-2301 Tacoma, WA (253) 620-6500 Asian Forensic Sciences Network 2010 Annual Meeting & Symposium Brunei 1-3 June 2010

2. Washington, DC Tacoma, Washington

3.  SOLVE MORE CRIME  PREVENT MORE CRIME  EXONERATE THE INNOCENT  COST / BENEFIT Why Offender DNA Databases?

4. Have Your Lawmakers Created Robust Database Policy? Offender Database Size Controls the “Hit Rates” Estimates Sex offenders 5% Sex offenders & Violent offenders 10% Sex offenders, Violent offenders and Property crimes 20% All crimes 45% All arrestees 60%

5. Politics of DNA Databases Decisions controlled by top Government officials. Legislation required in most countries. Crime Control vs. Privacy

6. The World is Positioning for Explosive Growth of Offender DNA Database Programs 2000~ 6% of the world’s population has passed and implemented offender DNA database legislation/policy (United States and United Kingdom) 2010 ~ 30% of the world’s population has passed and implemented offender DNA database legislation/policy Largest countries added between 2000 and 2010 : China, Germany, France and Spain 2015~ 60% of the world’s population will have passed and implemented offender DNA database legislation/policy. Largest countries with offender DNA database Legislation/Policy positioned to be passed and implemented by 2015: India, Brazil, Russia, and many Asian countries  How many total samples will there be in 2015 or 2020? 2010 – 20 million – 50% from the US and UK

7. ●●●● North America Central America South America Europe Middle East Africa Asia Australia & Oceania ●●●● Global Legislative Update

8. Comprehensive and up-to- date information on DNA database programs worldwide. Color-coded for easy recognition of database status Country profiles include DNA database criteria and technical specifics Continuously updated resources to include laws, amendments, news articles, and other external information International.DNAresource.com International.DNAresource.com

9. NORTH AMERICA

10. United States Until recently the United States focused just on convicted offenders In 2004 only 3 states collected DNA from arrested criminals Today, 23 states collected DNA from arrested criminals Laws allow for profile destruction if not convicted – Compare to the United Kingdom law. President Obama announces support of arrestee testing. New federal legislation to promote arrestee testing in the states Legislative focus on changing laws from convicted offenders to arrestees http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid70069263001?bclid=6 9917219001&bctid=70456124001

11. EUROPE

12. Europe Legislation passed in the last 12 months Italy - Convicted offenders – Passed June 2009 Greece – Convicted offenders – Passed August 2009 Macedonia - Convicted and arrested offenders – Passed August 2009 Who’s Next ? Ireland Belarus Czech Republic Lithuania

13. Arrestee policy European Court of Human Rights strikes down UK policy of permanent retention New coalition government in UK is headed towards destruction policy Big implications for all other European Countries Prüm Implementation of Prüm is primary focus in Europe European Court UK Prime Minister, David Cameron & Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg

14. ASIA

15. Asia Aggressive expansion in offender DNA databasing  Large Countries have begun or will soon begin offender testing: China (20% of world population), India (17% of world population), Japan (1.9% of world population), South Korea (.73 percent of world population) Who is next?  India Legislation positioned to pass in 2010 Priority for new leadership  Thailand Legislation being drafted. CODIS being Considered  Vietnam Offender database policies being developed CODIS being considered

16. AFRICA

17. Africa Mauritius Passed June 2009  Who is next? South Africa Nigeria Kenya Ghana

18. SOUTH AMERICA

19. Chile - Legislation passed in 2009  Limited to violent convicted offenders  Implementation expected soon Brazil  World’s second largest installation of CODIS (16 locations) - May 17, 2010  Databasing legislation expected in late 2010 South America

20. Summary of Key International DNA Database Policy Issues Arrestee Databases Arrestee Sample Profile Destruction Familial Searching  Significant benefits - UK has used it 185 times and has solved 33 serious crimes  Privacy concerns causing limited use

21. The Prüm Treaty A lesson in International Forensic Cooperation Prüm, Germany (Western Germany) Treaty signed May, 2005

22. What Is the Prüm Treaty? Cross-Border Cooperation to Automate the Exchange of:  DNA  Fingerprints  Vehicle registrations Policy Objectives:  Increase cross-border cooperation  Combat terrorism  Reduce illegal migration

23. What is the Prüm Treaty (Cont’d) No central database will exist  Each national database will only be compared against each other  Policy: The EU is organized to maintain a strong sense of independent national sovereignty in criminal justice matters. Hits in Prüm  Daily hit report – No personal data  Personal data only shared after going through legal assistance procedures  Policy: Governments very protective of citizen data Law enforcement and judicial difference between countries

24. Who Will Participate? Treaty Originally signed by  Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Luxemburg, Belgium, France, and Spain  Early cross-border tests between Netherlands, Austria and Germany established the momentum for Prüm European Union (EU) coverts Prüm Treaty into EU mandate - Council Decision 2008/615&616/JHA - June 2008  All 27 Countries of the EU  Implementation mandate by August, 2011  Non-EU European Countries Switzerland, Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland permitted to join Prüm FBI Develops CODIS 7.0 with Prüm in mind

25. How Prüm Works Joint development by Germany, Austria, and the Netherlands Credit: Dr. Kees van der Beek

26. How Prüm Works (Cont’d) TESTA Network Credit: Dr. Kees van der Beek

27. Prüm Inclusion Rules At least 6 of the 7 ESS-Loci for known persons  ESS – European Standard Set: European agreement to use 7 common Loci adopted by the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI) in 1999 – Expanded to 12 loci in 2009 At least 6 loci for crime scene stains No mixed profiles (only 2 values per locus) No profiles that a country does not want to make available (e.g. Elimination samples, suspect samples, etc.) Credit: Dr. Kees van der Beek

28. Prüm Matching Rules At least 6 fully matching loci 1 mismathcing allele allowed (near match) 1 basepair difference allowed (microvariants) Credit: Dr. Kees van der Beek

29. Adventitious Matches An expected consequence of Prüm  ESS of 7 loci was created for smaller separate individual DNA database searches  Prüm creates searching in multiple databases that could exceed tens of millions  Result: Numerous adventitious matches will occur Example: Netherlands - Germany Search Comparing 20,000 Dutch casework samples against 500,000 German database samples will lead to over 100 adventitious matches – many more when compared to all of Europe

30. Adventitious Matches (Cont’d)  Long-Term Fix  ESS for loci raised from 7 to 12  Little impact on adventitious matches in the short-term  EU policy:  Expect adventitious matches.  Do not assume a true hit unless other types of evidence exists

31. Prüm – Lessons Learned for Asia ENFSI & EU have a long history of collaborating and developing forensic standards. □HOWEVER, ENFSI or the EU did not envision large automated European wide sharing when choosing 7 loci as the original ESS. ASIA ADVANTAGE □ Large scale databasing is just now starting. □ Asian Forensic Science Network, and the Regional East Asia Forensic DNA Workgroup have organized to create the forum for discussion. PRÜM AS A MOTIVATOR □ How cross-border automated sharing can work. □ Caution - Plan for the future  Collect from a large standard set of loci.  Develop database standards that make future cross-border searching interoperable and efficient.

32. Acknowledgements We would like to thank the following individuals:  Dr.Ir. C.P. (Kees) van der Beek, MBA Custodian, Dutch DNA-database European Network of Forensic Science Institutes  Peter Schneider Institute of Legal Medicine University Hospital of Cologne, Germany

33. Thank You www.dnaresource.com tims@gth-gov.com