ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Court has ruled that a DNA test without consent of an individual constitutes a clear violation of his fundamental rights to liberty and privacy as guaranteed in Articles 9 and 14 of the Constitution.
“The collection of DNA of an individual without due process of law fundamentally violates rights to privacy, autonomy, and personal liberty, as it entails the extraction of extremely sensitive personal information,” said a 6-page judgement authored by Justice Muhammad Hasham Khan Kakar.
Through this order, an SC division bench led by Justice Kakar set aside a judgement of the Lahore High Court (LHC) which had upheld the decision of an anti corruption court in Sahiwal.
The anti-corruption court had directed the petitioner to arrange his DNA in order to determine his parentage in a matter related to forgery and corruption of educational documents with the intent to deprive him of his rightful inheritance.
The order noted with serious concern that the high court, in the order, maintained the directive for a DNA test without citing any specific legal provision authorizing the compulsory execution of a DNA test upon an individual without his express consent, in the context of a private complaint proceeding.
“We are mindful of certain provisions contained in sections 53A, 164A and 164B of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 requiring conduct of such DNA tests and other connected tests.
“However, they are conducted only in cases of charges of committing an offence of rape, unnatural offence or sexual abuse or an attempt to commit rape, unnatural offence or sexual abuse under sections 376, 377 and 377B of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 and the facts and circumstances in the instant case are entirely different.”
The judgement noted that in the instant case, the parentage of the petitioner has been presumed to be disputed by an anti-corruption court’s special judge without issuing process under Section 202 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
“We find that the order directing a compulsory DNA test without consent in such circumstances constitutes a clear infringement upon the fundamental rights of the petitioner to liberty and privacy, as explicitly guaranteed by Articles 9 and 14 of the Constitution,” it said.
The judgement noted that the entitlement to personal sanctuary, recognized as the right to privacy, necessitates shielding individuals from undue encroachment into their private domains.
“This protection extends to personal data, communications, family life, and all facets of the personal sphere against unwarranted interference by state or private entities.
