A legal challenge which will determine whether fingerprints and DNA samples taken from people who have not been prosecuted, or who have been acquitted of crimes, can be kept by the police has been fast-tracked to the highest court of the European Court of Human Rights. The barristers instructed in the case by Howells are Richard Gordon QC from Brick Court Chambers and Stephen Cragg at Doughty Street Chambers.

The initial decision for the cases to be considered by the European Court of Human Rights was delivered in March this year when the Court declared the cases admissable. The latest decision means that, instead of being heard by one of the lower chambers of the Court, the case will go straight to the Grand Chamber where all the judges take part. The decision has been taken because the court decided that the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation of the Convention or its protocols, or because its resolution might have a result inconsistent with a previous judgment of the Court.

Two cases are included in the challenge which is led by solicitor Peter Mahy, a civil liberties specialist at Sheffield-based Howells, a firm with a strong reputation in the field of human rights. One of the cases concerns a juvenile (who cannot be named for legal reasons) who was charged with an offence but acquitted, and the other concerns, a man, Michael Marper, who is charged with harassment and whose case did not go to court as the charges were dropped.

In both cases, the clients requested that their fingerprints and DNA samples be destroyed - but the requests were refused by South Yorkshire police. Both Mr Marper and the juvenile argued that the retention of fingerprints and especially DNA samples amounts to an unjustified breach of their right to respect for private life protected by Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. They are especially concerned about the future uses to which the DNA samples might be put, and the lack of independent oversight in the National DNA Database.

Mr Mahy said:

"This decision by the European Court of Human Rights gives us significant hope that these cases will finally result in a massive change in the law - providing protection for those acquitted of crimes against their fingerprints and DNA samples being kept, thus putting them on a level footing with those not previously accused of any crimes.

The fact that the European Court of Human Rights has fast-tracked this case - bypassing the normal Chamber hearing to go straight to a Grand Chamber shows just how seriously the court views this case.

We think this will be one of the most important human rights challenges the ECHR has grappled with over recent years, especially given the growing enthusiasm of the present government to make the DNA database as wide as possible. More and more innocent people are going to find that the State has retained their very "blueprint for life" in its official records.

We say that if you are not convicted of a crime you are entitled to be put back in the same position as anyone else without a criminal record. Indeed, many countries only retain DNA samples of those convicted of very serious offences.

I am delighted that the European Court of Human Rights has not only agreed to consider the case but has also moved it straight through to the highest level for judgement ."

The case has been referred to the Grand Chamber under rule 72 on relinquishment of jurisdiction by a Chamber in favour of the Grand Chamber.

For further information, please contact Peter Mahy at Howells on 0114 249 6666, or Kath Harding at Freshwater Northern on 0114 201 8011.