Fairness for all - except the innocent

Stuart White writes on Liberal Conspiracy what many Labour supporters & voters are probably saying among themselves, i.e. that the party of the left is getting it just as wrong on civil liberties as it did over Iraq.

The imposition of ID cards, biometric passports and body scanners is something that ministers can just about argue in their constituencies as a necessity in the face of terrorism. But the retention of DNA samples taken from people who have been arrested, although never charged with any offence or convicted, is a stance which already sits very uncomfortably with the “fairness for all” message that activists are supposed to deliver through letter boxes in coming months.

How then will they feel about reported plans by Alan Johnson to transform the UK government’s unwillingness to comply with a European Court of Human Rights judgement into a campaign message that “Tories are soft on crime” – because they also question the legality.

The Guardian reports that:
Ministers intend to reject a Tory compromise that DNA profiles of innocent people be kept for only three years, and instead make it an election issue.

Home Office sources indicate that the government is "in no mind to weaken" its DNA provisions and argue that the Conservative compromise will involve the police having to go repeatedly to the courts if they want to keep a DNA profile beyond three years.

Labour has already produced a campaign video which effectively accuses the Tories of being "the burglar's friend" for voting against the changes to the DNA retention regime.

It adds:
The government's crime and security bill, which includes the controversial DNA retention regime, has already passed through the Commons and is scheduled to have its second reading in the Lords on 29 March. Peers killed off an earlier attempt by the government to keep innocent DNA for up to 12 years and it is expected the six-year proposal will face renewed opposition.