THE DNA of a seven-year-old child has been put on the National DNA database by Merseyside Police, according to information released to the Daily Post under the Freedom of Information Act.

National organisations which campaign for civil liberties condemned the revelation as “shocking”, and accused the Government of “picking on kids who can’t fight back”. But Merseyside Police said the use of DNA had “revolutionised” policing and added that “samples are taken and stored on the database in line with legislation”.

The National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) provided the information – but refused to reveal the age of the youngest person from Cheshire whose DNA was added to the controversial database.

The NPIA said that, in respect of the information relating to Cheshire Constabulary, it “would undermine criminal proceedings”, and added: “In all the circumstances of the Cheshire case, the public interest in maintaining the exemptions outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

“However, the public interest maintaining the exemption in the Merseyside case is much less strong and, on balance, falls in favour of disclosure.”

But civil liberties campaign groups attacked the decision to keep the DNA of such a young child on the National DNA Database (NDNAD).

Last night, a spokesperson for Liberty said: “Targeting innocent children to expand the DNA database is the Government playing the wolf in sheep’s clothing.

“If the Government wants a National DNA Database, they should say so and hold a public debate, not pick on our kids who can’t fight back.”

According to the NPIA: “The youngest person/persons whose DNA profile is held on the National DNA Database whose DNA sample was submitted by Merseyside Police, whose Date of Birth is known, was seven when the profile was loaded to the database.”

In disclosing the information, the NPIA said: “The date of birth (DOB) held on NDNAD for a subject is the DOB provided by the individual to the police officer at the time of arrest or the time of providing the volunteer sample.

“On occasions, this may not be their true DOB. Checks are carried out by the NDNAD Custodian team on those samples loaded to the NDNAD taken from subjects aged under 10 to ensure that, where possible, the DOB is correct and that the sample has been taken with the consent of a parent or legal guardian.

“There are no powers for police to take samples from under-10s without this consent and for those samples which are volunteer samples there also has to be a second consent given to load the sample to the NDNAD.”

Terri Dowty, director of Action on Rights for Children, said she couldn’t understand why children aged under 10 would have their details retained on the database. But she said: “Sadly, though, I’m not surprised. It’s entirely wrong – but then it’s wrong that so many innocent children are on the database.”

Earlier this year, the Daily Post revealed that almost one in 10 people on Merseyside have their genetic profile stored on the national DNA database, following another Freedom of Information Act disclosure.

The figures showed that there are more than 200,000 profiles of people in Merseyside and Cheshire – many of whom have never been convicted of any crime – on the controversial database.

It has also been disclosed that the DNA profiles of more than 6,000 youngsters from across Merseyside and Cheshire are on the Home Office’s database.

Dr Helen Wallace, of Genewatch, said it was “shocking” that samples from a child so young should be kept on the DNA database.

She said: “Obviously, they may take the DNA of a child during an investigation, but it does beg the question why the DNA should be kept on the database for life.”

OPINION: PAGE 10

liammurphy