European Court of Human Rights Case Law on Genetic Information in the Scope of International Biomedical Law

Main Article Content

Paweł Kwiatkowski

Abstrakt

The aim of the study is to analyze the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on genetic information in the scope of international biomedical law, as expressed in the International Declaration on Human Genetic Data and the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Human Dignity in the Field of Application of Biology and Medicine. The Court held that the genetic information is protected under the law of the Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The model of the right to respect for private life is reflected in its shape, as the Court noted in the Van der Velden v. The Netherlands and S. and Marper v. The United Kingdom cases. It leads to the conclusion that the provision of Article 8 of the Convention provides the protection of genetic information, subject to certain restrictions that are “in accordance with law” and “necessary in a democratic society”. Such conclusion is in compliance with art. 12, art. 17 (b) art. 21 (c) of the International Declaration on Human Genetic Data, and art. 11 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Jak cytować
Kwiatkowski, P. (2020). European Court of Human Rights Case Law on Genetic Information in the Scope of International Biomedical Law. Przegląd Prawniczy Uniwersytetu Im. Adama Mickiewicza, 11, 119-137. https://doi.org/10.14746/ppuam.2020.11.07
Dział
Articles
Biogram autora

Paweł Kwiatkowski, University of Gdańsk, Faculty of Law and Administration

Paweł Kwiatkowski, University of Gdańsk, Faculty of Law and Administration, Bażyńskiego 6, Gdańsk 80–309, Republic of Poland, e-mail: pawel.kwiatkowski@prawo.ug.edu.pl.

Bibliografia

  1. Garlicki L., Komentarz do art. 8, in: Konwencja o Ochronie Praw Człowieka i Podstawowych Wolności. Komentarz do artykułów 1–18, ed. L. Garlicki, I, Warszawa 2010.
  2. Grzymkowska M., Standardy bioetyczne w prawie europejskim, Warszawa 2009.
  3. Heffernan L., DNA and fingerprint data retention: S and Marper v UK, “European Law Review” 2009, no. 34(3).
  4. Kapelańska-Pręgowska J., Informacja genetyczna jako kategoria chronionych danych osobowych. Uwagi na tle orzecznictwa Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka, in: Między wykładnią a tworzeniem prawa. Refleksje na tle orzecznictwa Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka i międzynarodowych trybunałów karnych, eds C. Mik, M. Gałka, Toruń 2011.
  5. Krajewska A., Informacja genetyczna a zakres autonomii jednostki w europejskiej przestrzeni prawnej, Wrocław 2008.
  6. Nawrot O., Ludzka biogeneza w standardach bioetycznych Rady Europy, Warszawa 2011.
  7. Peterson A., S. And Marper v. United Kingdom: the European Court of Human Rights Overturs the UK’s Procedure for the Indefinite Retention of Unconvicted Person’s Personal Data, “Tulane Journal of International & Comparative Law” 2010, vol. 18, issue 2.
  8. Schabas W., The European Convention on Human Rights. A Commentary, New York 2017.
  9. Symonides J., Międzynarodowe instrumenty prawne w dziedzinie bioetyki i biotechnologii, [in:] Prawa człowieka wobec rozwoju biotechnologii, ed. L. Kondratiewa-Bryzik, K. Sękowska-Kozłowska, Warszawa 2013.
  10. Dickson v. the United Kingdom, no. 44362/04, judgment of 4 December 2007.
  11. Foulon and Bouvet v. France, no. 9063/14 and 10410/14, judgment of 21 July 2016.
  12. Paradiso and Campanelli v. Italy, no. 25358/12, judgment of 27 January 2015.
  13. Glass v. the United Kingdom, no. 61827/00, judgment of 9 March 2004.
  14. M.A.K. and R.K. v. the United Kingdom, no. 45901/05 and 40146/06, judgment of 23 March 2010.
  15. S. and Marper v. United Kingdom, no. 30562/04 and 30566/04, judgement of 4 December 2008.
  16. Nowicki M.A., Wokół Konwencji Europejskiej. Komentarz do Europejskiej Konwencji Praw Człowieka, Warszawa 2017.
  17. Van der Velden v. Netherlands, no. 29514/05, decision of 7 December 2006.
  18. S. and Marper v. United Kingdom, no. 30562/04 and 30566/04, judgement of 4 December 2008.
  19. Halford v. United Kingdom, no. 20605/92, judgement of 25 June 1997.
  20. Phinikaridou v. Cyprus, no. 23890/02, judgment of 20 December 2007.
  21. Tyrer v. United Kingdom, no. 5856/72, judgement of 2 April 1978, § 73.
  22. Marckx v. Belgium, no. 6833/74, judgement of 13 June 1979.
  23. Keegan v. Ireland, no. 16969/90, Judgement of 26 May 1994.
  24. Golder v. United Kingdom, no. 4451/70, judgement of 21 February 1975.
  25. Weber and Saravia v. Germany, no. 54934/00, decision of 29 June 2006.
  26. S.H and Others v. Austria, no. 57813/00, judgment of 3 November 2011.
  27. Draon v. France, no. 1513/03, judgment of 6 October 2005.
  28. D. v. Ireland, no. 26499/02, decision of 27 June 2006.
  29. Jalloh v. Germany, no. 54810/00, judgment of 11 July 2006.
  30. Jäggi v. Switzerland, no. 58757/00, judgment of 13 July 2006.
  31. Tysiąc v. Poland, no. 5410/03, judgment of 20 March 2007.
  32. Darmon v. Poland, no. 7802/05, decision of 17 November 2009.
  33. Gronmark v. Finland, no. 17038/04, judgment of 6 July 2010.
  34. Backlund v. Finland, no. 36498/05, judgment of 6 July 2010.
  35. Koch v Germany, no. 497/09, judgment of 19 July 2012.
  36. Mennesson v. France, no. 65192/11, judgment of 26 June 2014.
  37. Labassee v. France, no. 65941/11, judgment of 26 June 2014.
  38. D. and Others v. Belgium, no. 29176/13, decision of 8 July 2014.
  39. Gross v. Switzerland, no. 67810/10, judgment of 30 September 2014.
  40. Y.Y. v. Turkey, no. 14793/08, judgment of 10 March 2015.
  41. Evans v. the United Kingdom, no. 6339/05, judgment of 10 April 2007.
  42. Handyside v. United Kingdom, no. 5493/72, judgement of 7 December 1976.
  43. Merger and Cros v. France, no. 68864/01, judgement of 22 December 2004.
  44. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 19 November 1996, CETS no.164.
  45. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms adopted 4 November 1950, ETS 5, 213 UNTS 222.
  46. Directive 95/46/EC of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data provides that the object of national laws on the processing of personal data, Official Journal L 281, 23/11/1995 P. 0031–0050.
  47. Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, 1984 c. 60.
  48. R. v. R.C., [2005] 3 S.C.R. 99, 2005 SCC 61.
  49. Recommendation no. R (87) 15 of the Committee of Ministers regulating the use of personal data in the police sector.
  50. Recommendation no. R (92) 1 of the Committee of Ministers on the use of analysis of deoxyribonucleic acid DNA within the framework of the criminal justice system.
  51. The Council of Europe Convention of 1981 for the protection of individuals with regard to automatic processing of personal data, ETS no. 108, 28.01.1981.
  52. The International Declaration on Human Genetic Data, adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO on 16 October 2003, SHS/EST/BIO/06/1.
  53. The Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights adopted by the General Assembly on the 11th Of November 1997, A/Res/53/152.
  54. United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989, United Nations Treaty Series, vol. 1577.