A DNA Biometric Implementation Model to Promote Thailand’s Criminal Justice System

Main Article Content

Wisarn Worasuwannarak
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9753-1662
Suppakorn Poonyarith
Sunee Kanyajit
Veenunkarn Rujipak
Worawee Waiyawuth

Abstract

DNA biometrics has proven to be a valuable tool in criminal justice systems worldwide, providing accurate identification and helping solve crimes effectively. However, Thailand faces several challenges in implementing DNA biometrics in its criminal justice system. This study aimed to explore the use of DNA as reliable biometric data in Thailand’s judicial and authentication processes, develop operational procedures for practical use, identify problems and obstacles, and propose a suitable model for implementation. The study employed documentary research and in-depth interviews with sixteen experts in the criminal justice system. The findings revealed that the absence of a central authority for collecting DNA biometric data results in disparate management of DNA databases and a lack of coordination between agencies. Personnel and budget issues, insufficient professional standards for forensic science officers, and the absence of a central agency responsible for forensic science work management also hinder Thailand’s forensic science operations. Issues related to crime scene protection, such as the lack of operational guidelines for collecting evidence and insufficient first-response units, were also identified. Furthermore, Thai judges often lack sufficient knowledge to assess the reliability of forensic evidence. Another major obstacle is the absence of a law to establish a central agency that administers the National DNA Database. The study proposes the establishment of a central agency to oversee the collection and management of DNA biometric data, the development of clear operational guidelines, and the provision of training for personnel involved in the criminal justice system to effectively implement DNA biometrics in Thailand.

Article Details

How to Cite
Wisarn Worasuwannarak, Suppakorn Poonyarith, Sunee Kanyajit, Veenunkarn Rujipak, & Worawee Waiyawuth. (2025). A DNA Biometric Implementation Model to Promote Thailand’s Criminal Justice System. Science & Technology Asia, 30(2), 241–255. retrieved from https://ph02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/SciTechAsia/article/view/255916
Section
Biological sciences

References

Jeffreys AJ, Wilson V, Thein SL. Individual-specific ’fingerprints’ of human DNA. Nature. 1985;316(6023):76-9.

Primorac D, Schanfield MS, Primorac D. Application of forensic DNA testing in the legal system. Croatian Medical Journal. 2000;41(1):32-46.

Gill P. Application of low copy number DNA profiling. Croatian medical journal. 2001;42(3):229-32.

Whitaker JP, Cotton EA, Gill P. A comparison of the characteristics of profiles produced with the ampflstr® sgm plus™ multiplex system for both standard and low copy number (lcn) str DNA analysis. Forensic Science International. 2001;123(2-3):215-23.

Williamson AL. Touch DNA : Forensic collection and application to investigations. J Assoc Crime Scene Reconstr. 2012;18(1):1-6.

Daly DJ, Murphy C, McDermott SD. The transfer of touch DNA from hands to glass, fabric and wood. Forensic Science International: Genetics. 2012;6(1):41-6.

Butler JM. Fundamentals of forensic DNA typing: Academic Press; 2009.

Goodwin W, Linacre A, Hadi S. An introduction to forensic genetics: John Wiley & Sons; 2011.

Jain A, Hong L, Pankanti S. Biometric identification. Communications of the ACM. 2000;43(2):90-8.

Kaye DH, Smith ME. DNA identification databases: Legality, legitimacy, and the case for population-wide coverage. Wis L Rev. 2003:413.

Sobiah R, Syeda R, Zunaira E, Nageen Z, Maria K, Syeda A, et al. Implications of targeted next generation sequencing in forensic science. J Forensic Res. 2018;9(02):1-8.

Messaoudi SA. Applications of ngs in analysis of challenging samples. Next generation sequencing (ngs) technology in DNA analysis: Elsevier; 2024. p. 387-411.

Hanson I, Fenn J. A review of the contributions of forensic archaeology and anthropology to the process of disaster victim identification. Journal of forensic sciences. 2024;69(5):1637-57.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. Codis-ndis statistics 2025 [Available from: https://le.fbi.gov/scienceand-lab/biometrics-andfingerprints/codis/codis-ndis-statistics.

Wallace H. The uk national DNA database. Balancing crime detection, human rights and privacy. EMBO reports. 2006;7 Spec No(Spec No):S26-S30.

Doleac JL. The effects of DNA databases on crime. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics. 2017;9(1):165-201.

Sinloyma P. Improving the efficiency of evidence collection and forensic processing systems of the royal thai police to enhance the administration of justice for the public. Suan Dusit Graduate School Academic. 2014;10(1):299-312.

McCartney C. Forensic data exchange: Ensuring integrity. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences. 2015;47(1):36-48.

Amankwaa AO. Trends in forensic DNA database: Transnational exchange of DNA data. Forensic Sciences Research. 2020;5(1):8-14.

Shabani M, Marelli L. Reidentifiability of genomic data and the gdpr: Assessing the reidentifiability of genomic data in light of the eu general data protection regulation. EMBO reports. 2019;20(6):e48316.

The Forensic Genetics Policy Initiative. Thailand [Internet]. [cited 2024 Sep 15]. Available from: https://dnapolicyinitiative.org/wiki/index.php/Thailand.

Nagin DS, Solow RM, Lum C. Deterrence, criminal opportunities, and police. Criminology. 2015;53(1):74-100.

Anker AST, Doleac JL, Landersø R. The effects of DNA databases on the deterrence and detection of offenders. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics. 2021;13(4):194-225.

Manokha I. Surveillance, panopticism, and self-discipline in the digital age. Surveillance and Society. 2018;16(2).

Smyth S. Biometrics, surveillance and the law: Societies of restricted access, discipline and control: Routledge; 2019.

Bufacchi V. Theoretical foundations for human rights. Political Studies. 2018;66(3):601-17.

Costello RÁ. Genetic data and the right to privacy: Towards a relational theory of privacy? Human Rights Law Review. 2022;22(1):ngab031.

Tongco MDC. Purposive sampling as a tool for informant selection. Ethnobotany Research and Applications. 2007;5:147-58.

Higginbottom GM. Sampling issues in qualitative research. Nurse Researcher. 2004;12(1):7-19.

Naderifar M, Goli H, Ghaljaie F. Snowball sampling: A purposeful method of sampling in qualitative research. Strides in development of medical education. 2017;14(3).

Noy C. Sampling knowledge: The hermeneutics of snowball sampling in qualitative research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2008;11(4):327-44.

Saunders B, Sim J, Kingstone T, Baker S, Waterfield J, Bartlam B, et al. Saturation in qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality & Quantity. 2018;52(4):1893-907.

Mwita K. Factors influencing data saturation in qualitative studies. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147- 4478). 2022;11(4):414-20.

Kaye J. Police collection and access to DNA samples. Genomics, Society and policy. 2006;2(1):16-27.

The Asahi Shimbun. Editorial: Law needed on deletion of DNA evidence to gain the public’s trust 2024 [Available from: https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/15413721.

Home Office. Forensic information databases annual report 2023 to 2024 (accessible) 2024 [Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/forensic-information-databasesannual-report-2023-to-2024/forensicinformation- databases-annual-report-2023-to-2024-accessible.

Chuesiang T. Rights and freedom protection: Study the collection of DNA evidence. 2013.

Tangon R, Nuansang J. Criminal justice and national DNA database: European union’s experience. Journal of politics, administration and law. 2016;8(1):459-76.

Jaraspinit S, Jenjob C, Intason P, Kaewnimit P, Kuptkanchanakul W, Jindavej O, et al. A study to standardize the use of DNA as evidence in criminal cases. 2008.

Sansira W. Enforcement of scientific evidence in civil and criminal cases - legal reflection. Chunniti. 2016;13(5):135-41.

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Human rights - handbook for parliamentarians n◦ 262016. 48.

Rudschies C, Čas J, De Hert P, Porcedda MG, Raab CD. Power in the modern ‘surveillance society’: From theory to methodology1. Information Polity. 2022;27(2):275-89.

INTERPOL DNA Monitoring Expert Group. Best practice principles: Recommendations for the establishment of a national DNA database: INTERPOL; 2015 [Available from: https://www.interpol.int/content/download/4876/file/MEG_Recommendation _Establishing_DNA_Database.pdf.

INTERPOL. Global DNA profiling survey results 2019: INTERPOL; 2019 [Available from: https://www.interpol.int/ar/content/download/15469/file/INTERPOL%20Global%20DNA%20Profiling%20Survey%20Results% 202019.pdf.