Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Legal and Constitutional Affairs
Issue 31 - Fourteenth Report of the Committee
Thursday, June 14, 2007
The Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs has the honour to present its
FOURTEENTH REPORT
Your Committee, to which was referred Bill C-18, An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to DNA identification, has, in obedience to the Order of Reference of Wednesday, May 9, 2007, examined the said Bill and now reports the same without amendment but with observations, which are appended to this report.
Respectfully submitted,
DONALD H. OLIVER
Chair
APPENDIX
BILL C-18, AN ACT TO AMEND
CERTAIN ACTS IN RELATION
TO DNA IDENTIFICATION
Observations to the Report of the
Standing Senate Committee on
Legal and Constitutional Affairs
Provided that an individual's rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms are respected, giving police the tools to utilize DNA fully in the investigation of crime is a worthy objective. Your Committee therefore supports the overall goals and methods of Bill C-18. We do, however, have concerns with some of its details.
We have reservations about the sharing of information found in the National DNA Data Bank with foreign jurisdictions. Our concern is that these jurisdictions may ask for information from the Data Bank in their efforts to resolve offences which are not offences under Canadian law. For example, non-violent political dissent may be considered a criminal act in certain jurisdictions and we do not wish to see the Data Bank facilitating the prosecution of these offences. Therefore, we recommend that one of the criteria for the sharing of information with foreign jurisdictions be that the offence alleged to have been committed in the foreign jurisdiction be considered an indictable offence under Canadian law and that appropriate legislation or regulations be prepared.
Your Committee also has concerns about the ability of the Attorney General to make an ex parte application (that is, one without notice to, and in the absence of, the affected individual) in order to correct a clerical error on a DNA order. Given that, in almost all cases, the facially defective order will have already been executed to obtain DNA evidence that may later be used against an individual, the government should consider a future provision by which the affected individual or his or her counsel would either receive prior notice of the application or disclosure that the application has been made and the order modified.
Your Committee notes the last recommendation of the Auditor General of Canada in her May 2007 report regarding management of the Forensic Laboratory Services (FLS). She stated that the RCMP should ensure that parliamentarians receive the information that they require in order to hold government to account for the performance of the FLS. Your Committee emphasizes that Parliament needs full and transparent reporting by the government in order to monitor and evaluate the cumulative effect that successive pieces of legislation have had, not only on the FLS, but on the operation of the DNA databank and its impact on individuals.
The DNA Identification Act came fully into force on June 30, 2000. Section 13 of the Act required a review of the provisions and operation of the Act within five years, to be undertaken by any committee of the Senate, of the House of Commons or of both Houses of Parliament. To date, no such review has been undertaken. Your Committee is concerned that two bills that originally set up a DNA data bank and now alter the manner in which it is operated and used will have been adopted by Parliament without a fundamental review of the system taking place. A review of the DNA system is urgently required, so that Parliament may determine what, if any, changes are required to improve it and the manner in which it is used.