Millions of rands are spent on DNA- testing technology to boost local forensic capacity, but widespread botch-ups render impotent what should be one of South Africa’s most powerful crime-fighting tools.
It costs R500 to process each of the 40 000 samples (a total cost of about R20-million) that police forensic science laboratories in Pretoria and Cape Town deal with annually. But underqualified staff, incompetence and a lack of resources in the police, health and judicial systems has been blamed for causing hiccups with DNA-testing technology.
This is bad news for the many women and children raped each year, as the prosecution of rape cases often stands or falls on the basis of DNA evidence. There are 52 000 rapes reported annually, but the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation believes that only one in 25 are reported, and puts the actual incidence of rape much higher.
According to independent forensic scientist Dr David Klatzow, DNA- testing technology is not a waste of money, but the way the technology is currently being used “is a disaster”.
Klatzow says “DNA is a subtle, difficult and exacting field” and believes that inexperienced juniors are being pushed into forensic departments.
This compromises the effectiveness of DNA technology that — when used correctly — can be unwaveringly beneficial. “DNA evidence can be especially beneficial in catching rapists and child abusers and we are relying on DNA testing more and more,” says Inspector Francois Bekker, spokesperson for the Pretoria forensic science laboratories (FSL).
Alexandra police reservist Paul Sekhoto says in the past three years they have been able to use the state-issue sexual offences crime kit for DNA collection. They have also seen DNA evidence in action.
“Once we apprehended a 24-year-old suspect raping a 42-year old woman. With the DNA sample taken at the time he was sentenced to 35 years,” he added.
Scientific solutions are, however, far from the minds of many of those raped in rural areas. In the KwaZulu-Natal Midlands, communities are serviced by mobile health clinics. Clinic staff are supposed to have received basic training to correctly use the sexual offences crime kit. Yet patients often don’t even have access to basic medical services.
“There are areas where the treatment for rape victims is completely unacceptable. Few women know they need to undergo an examination within 72 hours of a rape for forensic evidence to be collected,” said Debbie Harrison, director of Lifeline and Rape Crisis Pietermaritzburg. The Pietermaritzburg district sees about 25 new adult rape cases and 40 cases of child rape every month.
Even when a DNA sample is taken, there is no guarantee that it will end up as solid court evidence. “In the first place, police must apprehend a suspect to have someone the sample can be tested against. Also, since it became possible for any state doctor, and not just a district surgeon, to do a rape examination, samples are frequently not good enough for DNA evidence,” said Dr Lorna Martin of the University of Cape Town’s department of forensic medicine.
Department of Health communications officer Harry Mchunu says that some provinces continue to utilise the services of district surgeons, with a plan to increase coverage, while others have started replacing them with public service medical officers.
He acknowledges the discrepancy in the quality of sample collection. “As in any work situation, there will be workers who perform better than others. Our objective is to ensure all our forensic experts obtain the highest level of expertise.”
Bekker has criticised the health department’s decision to change the district surgeon system. “This is a big problem for the FSL, because district surgeons were trained specifically to do rape examinations and take DNA sample collections.”
He added that another problem is that police investigating officers often do not know how to preserve crime-scene material. Samples become contaminated when potential sources for DNA collection are poorly handled by investigating officers or when medical personnel fail to follow proper procedures.
Dr Munro Marx of Unistel laboratories in Stellenbosch, which works with the FSL, says such glitches have widespread ramifications, especially as last year’s rape conviction rate was only 7%.
“DNA is extremely strong evidence, but when prosecutors are challenged they often back down because they don’t understand the technology. We need a specialised corps of prosecutors who are educated about DNA evidence,” he said.
Bronwyn Pithey, senior state advocate for Soca (sexual offences and community affairs unit) with the National Directorate of Public Prosecutions, says prosecutors working in the country’s 39 sexual offences courts do receive training on how to use DNA evidence.
“It is vital for prosecutors to communicate better with their expert witnesses, so that experts can explain the significance of things such as DNA evidence to the court,” Pithey said.
Pithey added that while DNA evidence is essential to prove incidents of child abuse, the FSL often takes three months to process a sample.