Address concerns over taking DNA samples from Kenyans

Plans by the government to get deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) samples from all Kenyan citizens have elicited sharp reactions. Yet in the face of growing cases of terrorism and rise in violent crime, what motivates the government is understandable.

Criminals have been able to indulge in crime and walk away scot free. Indeed, such incidences in the past have informed the government’s commitment to building the Sh1.6 billion police forensic laboratory that will be operational within two months, according to the Director of Criminal Investigations.

DNA samples are taken by getting samples of a person’s saliva or blood which are then tested to get a person’s genetic code that is unique to each individual. Kenyans agree that crime and terrorisms must be fought, but the rider is that the fight should not curtail their fundamental and constitutional rights and freedoms, or expose them to more security risks should information in the governments keep leak.

Opponents of the proposal claim that DNA samples could be manipulated by the unscrupulous to perpetrate criminal activities. Such data coming into the hands of health insurers could be used to deny some people life insurance covers should their health be deemed to be in jeopardy due to certain terminal illnesses.

In keeping in tandem with technology advances, criminals have somehow managed to stay a step ahead of law enforcers, and chances are that if sensitive information falls into their hands are a result of corruption, they could use it to stage kidnappings or engage in blackmail.

Still, rogue state officials or agencies that thrive on corruption may use such information to target specific individuals. Information that could be beneficial to criminals should they access it includes  the postal addresses of individuals, global positioning coordinates that  can pinpoint the exact location where an individual stays.

Worse, such data could be used to manipulate elections; an aspect of our lives that has pitted Kenyans against each other every five years since the 1992 general elections. As late as August 2017, Kenyans took up arms over suspect elections and it took the personal initiatives of President Uhuru Kenyatta and opposition leader Raila Odinga to bring a semblance of peace through the March 9, 2018 handshake.

These are legitimate concerns  that must be addressed if the trust and confidence of Kenyans is to be earned. Technology is good, but gaps exist that show it is not entirely safe to entrust a person’s entire data to a single entity.

Examples of such risks abound. Despite encrypting data in its possession for greater security, social media platform Facebook was violated and information about certain people leaked.

There were claims that British political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica accessed Facebook data and used it in some of its campaigns. The firms operations in Kenya in the run up to the 2017 general elections raised eyebrows.

The government seeks to acquire more information on Kenyans when it embarks on the population census exercise that will be conducted in August this year. But, however noble the intention might be; should it be undertaken, it will be done without a policy and legal framework, which makes it even more risky.

There has to been data protection legislation in place before undertaking this exercise. Similar exercises have been tried elsewhere without success. The United Kingdom, India, and Australia, for instance, attempted  to gain DNA data from their citizens but faced such serious challenges, the exercises were abandoned.

If such countries with bigger capacities and the wherewithal to conduct  an exercise of this magnitude found it daunting, and not just from the legal point of view, we certainly cannot do it better than they could have. Even the few digital platforms that we have, such as the Kenya Revenue Authority website, can’t handle the traffic when it matters most.

Accessing the Ecitizen platform for services presents its own challenges. Thus, it is safe to say the governmental might be handicapped in handling the extra citizen information it seeks in its quest to keep the country safe while also acquiring the ability to go after criminals with confidence.