WHY IN NEWS?

India is set to implement DNA and facial recognition systems in 1300 police stations nationwide under the Criminal Procedure Identification Act, 2022.

WHAT IS DNA FACIAL RECOGNITION?

DNA facial recognition combines DNA analysis with facial recognition algorithms.It  aims to predict an individual’s facial features based on genetic information. DNA facial recognition technology is utilized to generate visual representations of suspects’ faces using their genetic information. This aids law enforcement in forensic investigations and criminal cases.

MECHANISM:

1. Scanning the face electronically
2. Collecting your facial features
3. Comparing those characteristics to those of another individual to discover whether there is a relationship.

TECHNOLOGY USE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM:

1. Expansive Databases: Law enforcement relies on vast databases storing fingerprints, DNA, and other data to aid investigations and identify crime trends.
2. Facial Recognition Software: Facial recognition technology is used to match faces from images against databases, offering a quick and convenient verification method.
3. Rapid Identification Systems: These systems allow officers to instantly access an individual’s criminal history using biometrics like palm prints, fingerprints, and facial recognition.
4. Voice Command Technology: Officers use voice command tech for hands-free control of tools and functions while on patrol, simplifying tasks like running license plates and recording notes.
5. Cell Phones: Law enforcement can intercept conversations and track suspect locations through cell phone wiretaps and tower records.
6. Monitoring Systems: Modern tools like GPS, drones, license plate scanners, gunshot detection, and surveillance cameras aid officers in locating criminals and monitoring crime scenes.
7. Digital Video Recording : The videos captured by a digital camera can serve as evidence later. Sometimes, it could be crucial proof in a complaint investigation or in court.
8. Rapid ID systems: This technology allows officers to have instant access to driver information.
9. 3D Imaging of Crime Scenes

This is new method of dissecting every aspect of a crime scene. It looks like something from science fiction. Those devices take a 3-dimensional scan of a whole crime scene, switching a lot of sketches and photos.

PROS:

Improved Efficiency: Technology reduces paperwork and automating routine tasks. This leads to increased efficiency in case management, record-keeping, and information sharing.

Data Analysis: Data analytics and predictive modeling help in identifying patterns and trends in criminal activity, aiding in proactive law enforcement and resource allocation.

Forensic Science Advancements: Technology has advanced forensic science significantly, leading to more accurate and reliable evidence in criminal cases. DNA analysis, fingerprint recognition, and digital forensics are some examples.

Improved Evidence Management: Digital evidence management systems help in securely storing and managing evidence, ensuring its integrity throughout the legal process.

Electronic Filing and Records: Digital records and electronic filing systems make case information more accessible and can expedite court proceedings.

Remote Proceedings: Technology allows for remote court proceedings, which can save time and resources, especially in situations where transporting prisoners is costly or risky.

Transparency: Technology can promote transparency in the criminal justice system by making information about cases, court schedules, and decisions more accessible to the public.

Monitoring and Supervision: Electronic monitoring and GPS tracking can be used for parolees and probationers, allowing for more effective supervision and reducing recidivism.

Biometrics: The use of biometrics, such as facial recognition and fingerprint scanning, can aid in identifying and tracking individuals in criminal investigations.

Access to Legal Resources: Technology can improve access to legal resources for individuals involved in the criminal justice system, making information on laws and regulations more readily available.

CONS:

Privacy and Data Security: Collecting and storing sensitive information, such as criminal records and evidence, raises concerns about data security and privacy. Breaches can lead to identity theft and misuse of personal information.

Bias and Discrimination: Algorithms and artificial intelligence used in predictive policing or risk assessment tools can perpetuate biases present in historical data, leading to unfair treatment, particularly for marginalized communities.

Transparency and Accountability: The opacity of some technology systems and algorithms can make it difficult to assess their accuracy and fairness.

Data Accuracy: Errors in data input or evidence collection can have serious consequences. Relying on technology without proper verification can lead to false accusations and wrongful convictions.

Electronic Surveillance Concerns: The use of electronic surveillance, such as body cameras and facial recognition technology, raises concerns about unwarranted surveillance and potential violations of civil liberties.

Legal and Ethical Issues: The rapid advancement of technology can outpace the development of laws and ethical guidelines, leaving gaps in the legal framework for dealing with novel issues.

Training and Education: Law enforcement and legal professionals need proper training and education to use technology effectively. The lack of training can lead to underutilization or misuse of technology.

Rapid Technological Advancements: Keeping pace with rapidly evolving technology is a challenge for criminal justice agencies. It requires continuous adaptation and investment.Top of Form

Criminal Procedure Identification Act, 2022

The Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022 authorizes law enforcement agencies to collect, store and analyse physical and biological samples of convicts and other persons to identify and investigate criminal matters.

1. Empowerment: The Act grants the authority to police officers or prison officers to collect identifiable information from convicts and individuals arrested for an offense. This information includes fingerprints, photographs, iris and retina scans, biological samples, and behavioral attributes.
2. Role of NCRB: The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) is empowered to collect, store, process, share, disseminate, and destroy records of measurements, as prescribed by rules.
3. Scope of Measurements: Measurements are required from all convicts, arrested persons, and those detained under preventive detention laws. However, for certain individuals, measurements are only taken if they are charged or arrested in connection with another offense, such as violating prohibitory orders or being arrested under preventive detention.
4. Authorized Personnel: While the Act allows measurements to be taken by police officers or prison officers, the Rules specify that authorized users, persons skilled in measurements, registered medical practitioners, or individuals authorized for this purpose may take the measurements. Authorized users are defined as police or prison officers authorized by the NCRB to access the database.
5. Storage Procedures: The Rules stipulate that the NCRB will issue Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for taking measurements, including specifications, formats, devices, and methods for handling and storing measurements. The SOPs also cover digital formats and encryption methods.
6. Record Sharing: To match measurement records, authorized users submit requests to the NCRB. The NCRB processes and matches the records, providing reports through a secure network. SOPs will guide the processing and matching of records.
7. Destruction of Records: The Act allows for the destruction of records for individuals who have not been previously convicted and are released without trial, discharged, or acquitted by the court. The NCRB follows prescribed procedures for record destruction. Nodal officers nominated by the state or central government or UT administration oversee the verification of records not linked to other criminal cases and recommend their destruction to the NCRB.

The Act repeals the existing “The Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920”, which authorizes the police to collect finger and footprint impressions and photographs.

What was the need to replace the Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920?

1.       In State of UP vs Ram Babu Misra case: The Supreme Court highlighted the need for amending the Identification of Prisoners Act.

2. 87th Report of the Law Commission of India in 1980: The Commission undertook a review of the Identification of Prisoners Act based on the Supreme Court ruling and the numerous amendments made to the Act by several States.

The commission recommended several amendments.

These include-

1. a)Expanding the scope such as “palm impressions”, “specimen of signature or writing” and “specimen of voice”.
2. b) Allowing measurements to be taken for proceedings other than those under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

SIGNIFICANCE:

1. The Act makes provisions for the use of modern techniques to capture and record appropriate body measurements.
2. It expands the scope of persons whose measurements can be taken.
3. This will help the investigating agencies to gather sufficient legally admissible evidence and establish the crime of the accused person.
4. It provides legal sanction for taking appropriate body measurements of persons who are required to give such measurements.
5. This will make the investigation of crime more efficient and expeditious and will also help in increasing the conviction rate.

ISSUES:

1. Potential Violation of Privacy Rights: The Act and Rules may infringe on an individual’s right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution and may not meet the fairness and equal treatment requirements of Article 14.
2. Scope Alteration: The Rules appear to alter the scope of the Act in multiple instances. They restrict the grounds under which a person’s data may be collected, which may exceed the Act’s provisions.
3. Expanded List of Authorized Personnel: The Rules expand the list of individuals who can collect measurements beyond what is specified in the Act, introducing ambiguity regarding who qualifies as a “person skilled in taking measurements.”
4. Restriction of Personnel: The Rules limit the category of officers who can take measurements and access the database, which may go beyond the scope of the Act, as it does not grant the NCRB or other entities the power to prescribe such restrictions.
5. Excessive Delegation: The Rules delegate significant rule-making power to the NCRB, potentially exceeding the permissible bounds of such delegation, as outlined by the Supreme Court.
6. Conflict in NCRB Guidelines: The NCRB issuing guidelines for its own activities could raise concerns about a potential conflict of interest and the separation of roles between guideline issuance and adherence
7. Destruction of Records Responsibility: The Rules place the onus on individuals to request the destruction of their records, which differs from other laws where the authority maintaining the information or the courts typically initiate record destruction.

WAY FORWARD

1. Review and Amendment: A comprehensive review of the Act and Rules should be conducted to address the issues related to privacy, scope, authorized personnel, and delegation of powers. Amendments may be necessary to align the legislation with constitutional and legal principles. Reintroduction of DNA regulation bill 2019 which was recently withdrawn.
2. Public Consultation: Engaging in a public consultation process is essential. It allows for diverse perspectives to be considered, and it can result in a more balanced and well-informed legislation.
3. Legal Scrutiny: Seeking legal opinions and conducting a thorough legal analysis can help in ensuring that the Act and Rules comply with constitutional and legal requirements.
4. Stakeholder Engagement: Involving stakeholders, including legal experts, civil rights organizations, and law enforcement agencies, is crucial to strike a balance between security concerns and individual rights.
5. Transparency and Accountability, Establish clear guidelines for the NCRB to ensure transparency in the collection, storage, and use of personal data. Mechanisms for accountability should be put in place.
6. Clarification on Destruction of Records: The responsibility for the destruction of records should be clarified, and the process should be simplified to ensure that individuals are not burdened with initiating this.
7. Parliamentary Oversight: If the Rules delegate significant powers to the NCRB, they should undergo parliamentary or legislative scrutiny to ensure that they align with the intent of the law.
8. Data Protection Framework: Considering the sensitive nature of biometric data, developing a robust data protection framework is crucial to safeguard the privacy of individuals.
9. International Best Practices: Studying and adopting international best practices in the collection and use of biometric data for law enforcement can provide valuable insights.
10. Periodic Review: Establish a mechanism for the periodic review of the Act and Rules to ensure they remain relevant and respectful of evolving legal and technological standards.

CONCLUSION

The police have benefited from technology, which has made them stronger in conducting criminal investigations, greatly reduce crime, and aid to uphold law and order.A connection between the public and the police is also made possible through technology. It aids law enforcement in defending public safety and property. Complaints from the public can be handled efficiently and quickly. So, for better and faster law enforcement, we must continue to upgrade technology.