Opposition to the forensic use of DNA in France: the jurisdiction and veridiction effects
- PDF / 396,506 Bytes
- 26 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 85 Downloads / 181 Views
Opposition to the forensic use of DNA in France: the jurisdiction and veridiction effects Joe¨lle Vailly1
•
Yasmine Bouagga2
Springer Nature Limited 2019
Abstract The use of genetic databases by the police and justice system has risen dramatically over the last 20 years, particularly in France, which has the second largest database in Europe. In such a context, this article analyses the legal and scientific effects of the forensic use of DNA on the formation of individuals’ (bio)identities in France. More specifically, we adopt a line of investigation that builds out from forms of resistance to genetic databases. Our methodology draws on a series of interviews and observations of legal proceedings against people who have refused to give DNA samples. In the first part of this text, we focus on the ‘jurisdiction effects’ of the DNA database being expanded to populations, showing that legal classifications (offender, suspect, etc.) constitute a key issue for these opponents. We then go on to analyse the ‘veridiction effects’ at work among social actors, in terms of the medical information/information related to origin that is conveyed (or not) by DNA profiles. In conclusion, we show that genetic analyses applied in a criminal context to populations, rather than simply individuals, shift (bio)identities through these dual effects, which form the basis of opponents’ resistance to genetic databases. Keywords Genetics Forensics Resistance Identity Anthropology France
& Joe¨lle Vailly [email protected] Yasmine Bouagga [email protected] 1
CNRS, Institut de recherche interdisciplinaire sur les enjeux sociaux (Iris, CNRS, Inserm, EHESS, Universite´ Paris 13), Paris, France
2
Laboratoire Triangle (ENS), Lyon, France
J. Vailly, Y. Bouagga
A group of activists who were opposed to the excessive use of advertising billboards ‘tagged’ such billboards in a downtown area in northern France. They were caught in the act and charged with ‘‘vandalism or minor damage of property with an inscription, symbol or drawing’’, a misdemeanour covered by the scope of the French national DNA database. The group did not deny their actions and—as activists—even claimed them, although they preferred the term ‘scribbling’ rather than vandalism; but they refused to give a DNA sample. At the end of the trial for these two offences, they were acquitted of the vandalism charge, but fined 500 euros with a suspended sentence for refusing a DNA sample. In a broader sense, some opponents of DNA sampling have been convicted several times for their refusals, because the request for their DNA was reiterated: if individuals have been convicted once for the crime, this does not prevent them from being convicted again for a new refusal. This example gives us an initial insight into the topic of genetic databases expanded to populations, arguments for refusing to be included in such a database, and the effects revealed by these arguments. Although the rationale of filing is an old one in France (Mattelart and Vitalis 2014), its developm
Data Loading...
