A/HRC/15/26 humanitarian law. International standards pertaining to the use of forensic science are not unified. It is necessary, therefore, to further analyse the impact on human rights of the use of forensics and especially forensic genetics more generally, outside the crime prevention context. 49. Human Rights Council resolution 10/26 appropriately attributes the competency for the development of adequate standards for the exercise of forensics to the relevant scientific community. Nevertheless, the exercise of forensic science needs to be scrutinized not only within the scientific community with a view to applicable scientific standards and practice, but also to its impact on human rights. Jurisprudence 50. While the development of forensic science has significantly enhanced the capabilities of governments to fulfil, inter alia, their human rights obligations, if applied without appropriate regulatory standards, it has the potential to trump individual rights. One recent court decision, for instance, demonstrates just how the application of forensic science impacts individual rights in the criminal law context. In the case of S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom2 the European Court of Human Rights held that the application of forensic science and in particular forensic genetics needs to conform to human rights standards, as enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). International instruments 51. The International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance sets out, inter alia, the use to which personal information can be put in the case of such disappearance; the duties of States parties in relation to the victims of enforced disappearance, including children who are victims themselves or are the children of victims; and the right of victims to know the truth about the circumstances of enforced disappearance, and the progress and results of any investigation. 52. Four other international legal instruments also address a number of ethical issues that are becoming increasingly apparent due to the rapid development of genetic science and its various applications. The intrusion on private life and the right to information are the areas most affected by these developments. While in a number of cases the concern was the legality of an infringement on rights without the consent of the person concerned, many applications of forensic genetics, for example in identifying missing persons in post-conflict and disaster situations, are being conducted through the voluntary participation of individuals, such as relatives. The only way to legitimize the intrusive application of genetic science, in such a context, is through the informed consent of the potential data subjects. 53. The Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (Oviedo Convention, 1997) stipulates the major principles on which subsequent instruments dealing with the topic continue to build. It provides a common framework for the protection of human rights and human dignity in both long-standing and developing areas concerning the application of biology and medicine.3 The Convention affirms a well-established rule that no one can be forced to undergo a medical intervention without his/her consent. Consent has to be free and informed and given on the basis of objective information from the responsible health-care professional as to the nature and the potential consequences of the planned intervention or of its alternatives, in the absence of any pressure from anyone. 2 3 S and Marper v. the United Kingdom (App. No. 30562/04) [2008] ECHR 1581 (4 December 2008) Explanatory report on the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine available at http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/Reports/Html/164.htm. 13