6 Accreditation of Forensic Science Laboratories
| (30720)
10964/09
+ ADD 1
--
| Draft Council Framework Decision on the accreditation of forensic science laboratory activities
Explanatory Memorandum
|
| Legal base | Articles 30(1)(c), 30(a), 31 and 34(2)(c) EU; consultation; unanimity
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 30 June 2009
|
| Department | Home Office |
| Basis of consideration | EM of 15 July 2009
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | October 2009
|
| Committee's assessment | Legally and politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information requested
|
Background
6.1 Article 34(2) of the EU Treaty authorises the Council of Ministers,
acting on the initiative of either a Member State or the Commission,
to adopt legislation on police and judicial cooperation in criminal
matters for which Title VI of the EU Treaty provides the legal
base. This Framework Decision is proposed by Sweden and Spain.
6.2 ISO/IEC 17025 sets out general requirements for
the competence of testing and calibration laboratories. The requirements
apply to, for example, the laboratory's quality management system,
the competence of the staff and the quality of the equipment.
Accreditation of a laboratory to the ISO standard ensures that
the methods the laboratory uses are valid, the equipment is appropriate
for the method, the staff performing the analysis are competent
and the organisation has the capacity to maintain the quality
of its results.
The document
6.3 In their explanatory memorandum about the draft
Framework Decision, the proposers (Sweden and Spain) say that,
with the growth in the volume of information exchanged between
Member States for the purposes of police and judicial cooperation
in criminal matters, it is becoming increasingly important to
ensure that the quality of the data is sufficiently high; this
applies as much to forensic evidence as to other data.
6.4 Article 1 says that the measure's objective is
to ensure that the results of the laboratory activities in one
Member State are recognised as being equivalent to the results
of laboratory activities in other Member States. The objective
is to be achieved by ensuring that all laboratory activities are
accredited to comply with ISO 17025 (see paragraph 6.2 above).
6.5 The draft Framework Decision:
- applies to "laboratory
activities" related to DNA and fingerprints;
- defines laboratory activities as any measure
taken when handling, developing, analysing or interpreting forensic
evidence;
- requires every Member States to ensure that laboratory
activities in its area are tested by the national accreditation
body for compliance with ISO 17025;
- requires Member States to comply with the Framework
Decision by January 2012; and
- requires the Commission to make a report on the
implementation of the Framework Decision before the beginning
of 2014.
The Government's view
6.6 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 15 July 2009,
the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Home Office
(Mr Alan Campbell) tells us that the commercial forensic science
laboratories in England and Wales and Forensic Science Northern
Ireland are already accredited to ISO 17025. The Scottish Police
Service Authority is accredited for DNA analysis and has applied
for accreditation for fingerprint analysis. In England, Wales
and Northern Ireland, the police forces are responsible for most
of the work on fingerprints and are not accredited to ISO 17025.
6.7 The Minister tells us that the Association of
Chief Police Officers broadly accepts the need for accreditation
but has reservations about the additional cost to police forces.
6.8 The Minister also says that the Government supports
the proposed use of the ISO for DNA and fingerprint evidence.
He adds, however that the Government:
"will take care to ensure that these provisions
do not require the UK to accept the results of laboratory activities
carried out in other Member States to be recognised as admissible
for evidential purposes in UK courts […]."[17]
Conclusion
6.9 Article 30(a) and 31 of the EU Treaty are
cited as legal bases for the Framework Decision. We question this
because the Treaty does not contain an Article 30(a) and because
Article 31 goes far wider than the provisions of the draft Decision.
Article 31 covers judicial cooperation for purposes such as extradition
and preventing conflicts of jurisdiction and it requires the Council
to encourage cooperation through Eurojust.
6.10 Article 1 of the draft Framework Decision
clearly states the objective of the measure: mutual recognition
by all Member States of forensic evidence about DNA and fingerprints
emanating from laboratories which have been accredited to ISO
17025 wherever they are located in the EU. The Minister says that
the Government supports the use of ISO 17025 but also says that
it will ensure that the requirements for mutual recognition will
not apply in the UK. We do not understand why the Government appears
to oppose the objective of the Framework Decision. We also wonder
whether the measure would be consistent with the principle of
subsidiarity if, as the Government appears to wish, it did no
more than require Member States to ensure that the relevant laboratory
activities comply with ISO 17025.
6.11 We should be grateful for the Minister's
comments on these points. Pending his reply, we shall keep the
document under scrutiny.
17 Minister's Explanatory Memorandum, paragraph 21. Back
| 
