UK drops DNA tests for refugees and asylum seekers
June 17, 2011 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
Britain has dropped a policy of using DNA tests to identify the nationality of African refugees and asylum seekers after criticism that there is no scientific merit to the practice.
The government “does not plan to take forward DNA or isotope testing for country of origin identification purposes,” and has also suspended an internal review of the program, according to a statement issued Friday by the U.K. Border Agency. It did not explain why it was discontinuing the program.
The pilot project first began in 2009 and was heavily slammed by experts, who said it was not possible to pinpoint a person’s nationality based on their genes. British authorities described the testing as voluntary, and some applicants were asked to provide a mouth swab or hair or nail sample in cases where there were questions about their nationality.
Government challenged on asylum seeker DNA tests
August 26, 2010 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
The UK Government could be acting illegally if it uses DNA testing to try to determine the country of origin of asylum seekers, a leading Scottish human rights campaigner says.
Professor Alan Miller, chair of the Scottish Human Rights Commission, and a top human rights lawyer, said moves to use DNA testing as a permanent part of the asylum application process could be contested in the European Court of Human Rights – reports the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations (http://www.scvo.org.uk/).
Professor Miller was speaking at a Scottish Festival of Politics event that debated the legal and moral basis for a recent six month UK Border Agency (UKBA) pilot that used DNA testing in cases where an asylum seeker’s country of origin was in doubt.
The controversial UKBA Human Providence Pilot was aimed at addressing alleged problems of African asylum seekers claiming to come from war-torn Somalia because they were more likely to have their application approved.
However, it was amended at the last minute after an outcry from human rights bodies and scientists who claimed that it wasn’t possible to accurately determine a person’s country of origin from their DNA.
Testing did go ahead but the UKBA argued that it would not be used to determine a person’s right to asylum.
UK Immigration minister Damien Green, who is carrying out a review of the asylum process, has not yet indicated whether the controversial move will be rolled out permanently.
“If the government wants to legislate and put this into the asylum system they are on very, very shaky ground and they would be very susceptible to [being] challenged in the European Court of Human Rights,” said Miller at the event organised by the British Council and the Economic and Social Research Council Genomics Forum.
Genetic tests for UK asylum seekers draw criticism
November 5, 2009 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
The United Kingdom Border Agency launched the pilot project in September amid suspicions there might be a large number of asylum applicants lying about their home countries. An agency spokesman said Britain was the only country using genetic tests in this way.
Experts, however, say the tests are based on flawed science and there’s no way genetic swabs can provide meaningful evidence regarding nationality.
Concerned about potential fraud, the Bush administration launched a pilot DNA testing project in 2007 to vet applicants to a program that allows family members of African refugees already in the United States to join them.
The project, which wrapped up in March 2008, found an extremely high rate of fraud — 87 percent — among applicants claiming to be related to each other, the State Department said, and the resettlement program was suspended until those concerns could be addressed. The U.S. does not use genetic tests to try to prove nationality.
U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said in London on Thursday that the U.S. has other ways of probing a person’s country of origin, such as testing language skills.
“I haven’t thought about it,” she said of the British attempt to match DNA to nationality. “We have a variety of ways we can use when we think someone is not telling the truth.”
Authorities in Britain described the testing as voluntary and said applicants would be asked to provide a mouth swab or hair or nail sample only in cases where questions arise about their nationality and they would be free to decline.
The government argues such tests can provide valuable — although not conclusive — evidence in assessing whether or not asylum seekers are telling the truth about their country of origin.
So far, the tests are being used only on people who claim to be from Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Uganda and Sudan, though if successful, officials say the plan could be rolled out further.
Several experts slammed the effort as “fundamentally flawed science,” and a petition has been sent to Prime Minister Gordon Brown calling for the project to be dismantled.
“Genes are not aware of national borders,” said Sir Alec Jeffreys, a geneticist at the University of Leicester who developed techniques for DNA fingerprinting.
“Nationality is a legal concept, and it’s got nothing to do with genetics at all,” said Jeffreys, adding that the kind of genetic research needed to identify ethnic origins according to DNA in Africa has never been done.
Human rights experts said the voluntary label was misleading.
“If people do not consent to this test, that could jeopardize their application or otherwise be construed negatively,” said Jill Rutter, a spokeswoman for Refugee and Migrant Justice, a London-based legal charity for asylum seekers and migrants.
“Refugees might not be in a position to understand what’s going on and they could be without legal representation when this request is made,” Rutter said. “It puts them in a very vulnerable position and their rights may be infringed upon.”
Refugees may be eligible for asylum in Britain if they can prove they face persecution at home because of their race, religion, political views, sexual orientation, or other factors.
Last year, nearly 26,000 people applied in Britain; of the more than 19,000 cases where decisions were made, 3,725, or 19 percent, were granted asylum. People from more repressive or chaotic countries, like Sudan or Somalia, often have a better chance of gaining asylum than those from more stable countries like Kenya.
In a document describing the project, the Border Agency acknowledges “testing will only provide a clue to the person’s ancestral lineage allowing a probable identification with a particular country.”
The agency had originally planned to use genetic test results as definitive proof of nationality, but scaled that back after scientists protested. A spokesman for the agency said results would only be used in combination with other ways of determining an asylum seeker’s nationality, such as language analysis and interviews, and would not be used to deport anyone.
“We are only trying to establish the efficacy of this approach,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity in line with government policy. The Border Agency expects to test about three samples a week during the 10-month-long project.
The tests will also be used to determine if the children asylum seekers are trying to bring into Britain are actually related to them. In addition to the pilot program in the U.S., such testing on children has also been conducted in France.
Besides genetic tests, British officials are also performing isotope analysis of asylum seekers’ hair and nail samples. Scientists can look at the composition of certain elements like oxygen or strontium in hair and nails to see where a person has been.
But these isotopes are present only so long as the hair and nails have recently been growing, meaning such tests will only give clues into an applicants recent whereabouts.
“I don’t see how hair and nails can be used to tell you anything about (birth) origins,” said Jane Evans, an isotope expert at the National Environment Research Council in Nottingham.
It is possible to get more precise information about a person’s origins using isotopes, but only with a bone or tooth sample, she said.
Britain has been a lightning rod of controversy in the debate over security versus civil liberties.
It has one of the largest DNA databases in the world, with more than 5 million samples collected by authorities to help fight terrorism and crime.
In a landmark decision, the European Court of Human Rights recently ordered Britain to destroy nearly 1 million DNA samples and fingerprints on its database — samples taken from children, people who had never been charged or people acquitted of crimes.
Since terror attacks in the U.S. and Britain, authorities have also used DNA collection as an important counterterrorism tool.
DNA samples taken on battlefields in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan from detainees and suicide bombers have provided clues about terror cell members and how they are linked to global cells, British security officials said.
Samples taken during terror raids in Britain have also allowed investigators to trace suspects to suspects abroad, said the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of their work.
Experts said that while it is legitimate for the government to try to confirm asylum seekers’ claims, it has to do that in ways compatible with the principles of a democratic society — and with a credible test.
“Genetic testing may be able to tell you where somebody’s ancestors started out, but it doesn’t tell you where they’re from,” said John Harris, a professor of bioethics at Manchester University, who also sits on the government’s Human Genetics Commission.
“It won’t give them anything worth knowing, and it’s very likely that what it will give them is misleading.”
Associated Press writers Paisley Dodds and Gregory Katz in London and Eileen Sullivan and Matthew Lee in Washington contributed to this report.
UK Border Agency flip-flops on asylum seeker DNA tests
October 16, 2009 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
By Chris Williams
After it “temporarily suspended” its controversial nationality DNA testing pilot, the UK Border Agency on Tuesday changed its stance again, saying the programme will go ahead, but the results won’t be used to decide asylum seekers’ fate.
DNA fingerprints and isotope analysis will be collected from asylum seekers, but “they will not be used for evidential purposes on individual cases”, a Home Office spokeswoman told The Register.
The “Human Provenance Pilot” aims to use ancestry and the chemical composition of asylum seekers’ bodies to help determine their nationality. It aimed in particular to address the problem of African immigrants falsely claiming to come from conflict-ravaged Somalia; a ruse known as “nationality swapping”.
Originally, those applying for asylum were to be told that refusal to submit to the tests “undermines your claim to be a refugee”. The spokeswoman said UKBA was working on new instructions that will not include such threats.
“We have always been clear that this is a pilot programme and as such we keep its terms of reference under review,” UKBA said.
“We continuously look at new and improved ways to ensure that we can ascertain the correct identity and nationality from every asylum seeker.
“There was never any suggestion that these tests would be used in an isolated or conclusive way and we will carry out a full review of the pilot before it is rolled out.”
The Human Provenance Pilot has provoked heavy criticism from the scientific community.
A memo announcing its temporary suspension, for an indeterminite period, was posted to the UKBA website late last week and highlighted by The Register. Scientists welcomed the move, but the text was altered soon after.
It now states: “Alterations have been made to the nationality swapping – Isotope analysis and DNA testing process. This process continues to operate.
“The present instruction has been withdrawn whilst amendments are made.”
The Home Office spokeswoman said today the previous memo had been replaced because it was unclear*.
News the pilot is going ahead will provoke further consternation from geneticists. An editorial in Nature, published before UKBA posted its “temporary suspension” order, condemns it as “scientifically flawed, ethically dubious and potentially damaging to science”. ®
*Thanks to Action on Rights for Children for spotting the change to the memo following our story.
The original memo said: “The nationality swapping – Isotope analysis and DNA testing process has been has been temporarily suspended and the instruction withdrawn. Officers will be notified when the process resumes.”
Scientists Decry “Flawed” and “Horrifying” Nationality Tests
By John Travis
Scientists are greeting with surprise and dismay a project to use DNA and isotope analysis of tissue from asylum seekers to evaluate their nationality and help decide who can enter the United Kingdom. “Horrifying,” “naïve,” and “flawed” are among the adjectives geneticists and isotope specialists have used to describe the “Human Provenance pilot project,” launched quietly in mid-September by the U.K. Border Agency. Their consensus: The project is not scientifically valid–or even sensible.
“My first reaction is this is wildly premature, even ignoring the moral and ethical aspects,” says Alec Jeffreys of the University of Leicester, who pioneered human DNA fingerprinting.
U.K. immigration policies have been under scrutiny recently as the number of people claiming asylum has soared and as French police in Calais last week cleared a camp of migrants hoping to make it across the English Channel. The existence of a DNA-based program to identify nationality was recently revealed by the Daily Mail and The Observer, sparking protests from refugee advocates. Science has obtained Border Agency documents showing that isotope analyses of hair and nail samples will also be conducted “to help identify a person’s true country of origin.” The project “is regrettable,” says Caroline Slocock, chief executive of Refugee and Migrant Justice headquartered in London. Although asylum-seekers are asked to provide tissue samples voluntarily, turning down a government request for tissue could be misinterpreted, she says, “so we believe [the program] should not be introduced at all.”
The Border Agency’s DNA-testing plans would use mouth swabs for mitochondrial DNA and Y chromosome testing, as well as analyses of subtle genetic variations called single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). One goal of the project is to determine whether asylum-seekers claiming to be from Somalia and fleeing persecution are actually from another African country such as Kenya. If successful, the Border Agency suggests its pilot project could be extended to confirming other nationalities. Yet scientists say the Border Agency’s goals confuse ancestry or ethnicity with nationality. David Balding, a population geneticist at Imperial College London, notes that “genes don’t respect national borders, as many legitimate citizens are migrants or direct descendants of migrants, and many national borders split ethnic groups.”
After reviewing the Border Agency’s plans, Jeffreys echoed those criticisms in an e-mail to Science: “The Borders Agency is clearly making huge and unwarranted assumptions about population structure in Africa; the extensive research needed to determine population structure and the ability or otherwise of DNA to pinpoint ethnic origin in this region simply has not been done. Even if it did work (which I doubt), assigning a person to a population does not establish nationality – people move! The whole proposal is naive and scientifically flawed.”
Another geneticist says the Forensic Science Service, a former government agency that has been privatized, requested his opinion earlier this year on how to develop a genetic assay to distinguish among East African populations. “I thought it was for forensic purposes, not border control,” says Christopher Phillips of the University of Santiago de Compostela in Spain, who with colleagues recently used a DNA sample to correctly infer the ancestry of a suspect in the 2004 train bombings in Madrid. After expressing skepticism about the goal,Phillips suggested some research the FSS could conduct but says he heard no more from them.
Mark Thomas, a geneticist of University College London who considers the Human Provenance program “horrifying,” contends that even determining a person’s ancestry–as distinct from nationality–is more problematic than many believe. “mtDNA will never have the resolution to specify a country of origin. Many DNA ancestry testing companies have sprung up over the last 10 years, often based on mtDNA, but what they are selling is little better than genetic astrology,” he says. “Dense genomic SNP data does have some resolution … but not at a very local scale, and with considerable errors.”
Details of the plan to use isotope analyses in addition to DNA analyses have intensified skepticism. The plan is to look for ratios of certain isotopes in tissue that could be matched to ratios in the environment where a person was born or grew up. But isotope specialists point to a seemingly obvious flaw: There’s no scientifically accepted evidence that isotope signatures at birth or during childhood are still present in adult samples of constantly growing tissues such as hair and nails. At best, researchers say, those tissues reflect the past year or so of a person’s life. “It worries me as a scientist that actual peoples’ lives are being influenced based on these methods,” says Jane Evans, head of Science-based Archaeology at the National Environment Research Council Isotope Geosciences Laboratory in Nottingham.
Although the agency hasn’t detailed the isotopes it is examining, the use of hair and nail samples suggest the tests will look at “lighter” element isotopes, such as those of hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, and nitrogen, all of which are incorporated into the keratin and other proteins as those tissues grow. Isotopes of strontium and other “heavier” elements incorporate into bones and teeth throughout life and some evidence suggests that strontium measurements can match people to geographic locales in which they were born, or at least grew up. In contrast, the lighter isotopes in tissues such as hair and nails being collected by the Border Agency are typically used to reveal recent diets and climatic conditions, not ethnicity. “I don’t think I could tell the difference between a Kenyan and a Somalian,” says Tamsin O’Connell of the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom, an archaeologist who specializes in studying light isotopes from soft tissues.
O’Connell, Evans, and others say they’re puzzled that one Border Agency document titled “Nationality-Swapping” uses the notorious “Adam Torso” case as a proof of principle for employing isotope analysis. In this highly publicized murder in 2001, only the mutilated torso of a teenager was found in the Thames river. Using isotope analysis, “the child’s body was traced to a small Nigerian town in an area about 100 x 50 km wide,” a Border Agency document states (The documents and further scientific reaction will be found at this link). The document notes, however, that the analysis was done on bones, not hair and teeth. “It’s like adding 2 and 2 and getting 3 ½,” says Jessica Pearson of the University of Liverpool, who uses isotope signatures from fossils to examine the diet of ancient humans. Pearson also points out that the forensic methods used in the Adam Torso case are impossible to evaluate because they still haven’t been described in a scientific publication or discussed in court.
Having their fate rest on unproven methods is particularly dangerous for asylum-seekers in the United Kingdom, notes Phillips, because unlike criminal defendants, they have limited or no rights to challenge evidence or appeal. “You can’t parachute in a technique if it isn’t properly validated,” he says.
The Border Agency says only asylum-seekers who have already failed linguistic tests—another contested method of determining nationality—will be asked to provide mouth swabs, hair and nail samples. It also released a written response to scientific criticisms, which said: “Ancestral DNA testing will not be used alone but will combine with language analysis, investigative interviewing techniques and other recognized forensic disciplines. The results of the combination of these procedures may indicate a person’s possible origin and enable the UKBA to make further enquiries leading to the return of those intending on abusing the U.K.’s asylum system. This project is working with a number of leading scientists in this field who have studied differences in the genetic backgrounds of various population groups.”
The Border Agency has not yet responded to a request to identify the scientists it is working with, nor has it cited any scientific papers that validate its DNA and isotope methods. It’s also not clear who is conducting the DNA and isotope analyses for the Border Agency. Evans says her lab, which is arguably the U.K.’s leading academic center for isotope studies, is not involved. Several researchers say they suspect private labs are doing most of the work—and they question if such labs have been properly vetted for reliability. Among their many concerns, some scientists also worry that statistical uncertainties may be overlooked.
A Border Agency spokesperson defended its Human Provenance program as a “small pilot at the moment. It’s in its baby stages. We want to get feedback.” They’re getting plenty of that from outraged scientists. “I’d hate to see asylum decisions made [with these methods]. It’s peoples’ lives we’re dealing with,” says Pearson.
DNA tests for asylum seekers ‘deeply flawed’
September 21, 2009 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
By Jamie Doward
UK Borders Agency believes this test will help limit claims by people pretending to have fled war zones
Asylum seekers are to be subjected to DNA tests in an attempt to confirm their true nationalities, the Observer can reveal.
The UK Borders Agency believes this will help limit bogus asylum claims made by people arriving in the UK and pretending to have fled war zones so they cannot be deported. But the “Human Prevalence Pilot Project”, which is being launched as a pilot and without fanfare, has been fiercely criticised by migrant support groups who describe it as “deeply flawed”.
According to the Home Office, the scheme will involve taking “forensic samples provided on a voluntary basis from those suspected of abusing the asylum system”. At first, the six-month pilot will target claimants arriving from the Horn of Africa.
The Borders Agency has been concerned for some time that Kenyans pass themselves off as Somalis in the hope of gaining asylum.
But the project could be expanded to other nationalities if successful, a Home Office spokeswoman confirmed. At first it will be used only on those who fail language analysis testing, which has been used for years to determine the country of origin, but is open to legal dispute.
Refugee support groups expressed fury. They are concerned about how DNA testing will work and whether it will be able to distinguish legitimately between the profiles of the many nomadic peoples from eastern Africa.
“It is regrettable that this pilot has been introduced without consultation, as there are obvious pitfalls in trying to prove nationality genetically,” said Caroline Slocock, of Refugee and Migrant Justice. She said it “would lead to serious miscarriages of justice”.
Sandy Buchan, of Refugee Action, said: “Many of those who seek asylum are two or even three generations removed from the country of origin of their parents and grandparents, and are fleeing areas other than the nation of their birth. A Zimbabwean farmer fleeing persecution may possess the DNA of British relatives; would they be denied asylum on that basis?”
The Home Office spokeswoman said ancestral DNA testing would not be used alone but would be combined with language analysis, investigative interviewing techniques and other recognised forensic disciplines.
Black churches condemn Home Office decision on holding DNA of innocent
May 8, 2009 by Webmaster · Leave a Comment
Black church leaders and community groups have joined protests from civil rights campaigners over the UK government’s decision to retain DNA profiles on close to a million innocent people for up to 12 years.
The DNA and fingerprints of people who have been cleared of crimes or have never been charged, will be kept for six years and those accused of a serious violent or sexual offence but not convicted, will be kept for 12 years.
The Home Secretary, Jackie Smith, announced the decision in tandem with the launch of a new consultation on proposals to delete the computerised DNA records and fingerprints of innocent people, in response to the European Court of Human Rights ruling that the current practice of storing the DNA of the innocent is illegal.
“A public consultation is welcome, but it is clear from the European Court Ruling on the retention of the DNA and fingerprints that profiles of people who have never even been charged with an offence or have been cleared of a crime should be removed from the database and destroyed,” said Matilda MacAttram, director of Black Mental Health UK.
She continued: “Whole communities have found themselves criminalised by this system. For an innocent citizen to be expected to put up with a six to 12 year wait to have their DNA removed from a criminal database can hardly be deemed to be justice.”
Campaigners claim that over-policing of black communities is reflected in the strong racial bias of the database, which is estimated to contain the DNA profiles of over a third of the black male population living in the UK, despite this group having lower lifetime offending rates than their white counterparts.
Official statistics show that 57 per cent of DNA taken from people proven innocent in London alone comes from African Caribbean communities.
An estimated 77 per cent of young black men aged between 15 and 34 are also on the database, leading to assertions from many quarters that rather than helping to fight crime, the database has effectively criminalised a whole section of society.
“This potentially effects every black family in the UK it is a very serious issue,” the Rev Pedro Okoro, lawyer and former chair of the executive board of African Caribbean Evangelical Alliance, commented.
“The Home Office’s response pays lip services to the European Ruling on the retention of innocent DNA,” he added. “The government should put this judgement into full effect and destroy DNA profiles and fingerprints of every innocent person currently on the database. There are people who face false accusations all the time, but when they are found innocent they should be afforded the same rights as every other law-abiding citizen.” – Ekklesia
