Question NW1582 to the Minister of Police
27 August 2020 - NW1582
Whitfield, Mr AG to ask the Minister of Police
What number of DNA samples received from (i) D1 Adult Sexual Assault Evidence Collection kits and (ii) D7 Paediatric Sexual Assault Evidence Collection kits (aa) have not been analysed by the National Forensic Science Laboratories (NFSL) and (bb) were contaminated during analysis at the NFSL in the 2019-20 financial year and (b) what are the further relevant details in this regard?
Reply:
(a)(i)(ii) The packaging of the D1 Adult Sexual Assault Evidence Collection kits and the D7 Paediatric Sexual Assault Evidence Collections, contain different utensils, such as, evidence sealing bags, J88 forms and the collection of forensic eviclence forms, etc. The Biology Section of the South African Police Service (SAPS) Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL), receives the collected evidence with samples, for analysis purposes. The FSL does not register and keep track of the type of evidence collection kits received and thus cannot distinguish between the D1 Adult Sexual Assault Evidence Collection kits and D7 Paediatric Sexual Assault Evidence Collections.
(aa) On 20 July 2020, the number of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) samples received and still in the process of being analysed, was as follows:
|
Eastern Cape: DNA Analysis Laboratory |
1 079 |
|
Gauteng/Head Office: DNA Analysis Laboratory |
12 030 |
|
Western Cape: DNA Analysis Laboratory |
4 014 |
|
KwaZulu-Natal: DNA Evidence Recovery Laboratory |
896 |
|
Total |
18 019 |
(bb) Based on the Quality Management System, in accordance with the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) 17025: Quality Control Principles, a total of 52 DNA samples were identified as contaminated, during the processing of the samples, in 2019/2020.
The FSL registers a non-conformance for all samples that have been contaminated. In line with the requirements of the ISO-17025, a root cause analysis is performed and corrective action identified, to prevent or minimise possible future reoccurrence. The table below, reflects the details, with the regard to the 52 DNA samples, mentioned above:
DNA finding report issued , due to the availability of additional exhibit material
|
Reference |
Area of contamination |
|
No result reported in cases additional due to the non- availability of exhibit material |
|
|
Ref NC 19/04/19 (two cases) Ref NC 10/06/19 (one case) Three cases involved No result could be reported |
Sample submissions. The contamination was due to the manner, in which the samples were processed. |
|
ex DNA finding report issued , due to the availability of additional exhibit material |
|
|
NC 08/04/19 (two cases) |
|
|
NC 13/04/19 (two cases) |
|
|
NC 15/04/19 (two cases) |
|
|
NC 19/04/19 (two cases) |
|
|
NC 24/04/19 (two cases) |
|
|
NC 02/05/19 (two cases) |
|
|
NC 03/05/19 (two cases) |
Sample submissions. The |
|
NC 07/05/19 (two cases) |
contamination was due to the |
|
NC 10/06/19 (nine cases) |
manner, in which the samples were |
|
NC 01/07/19 (two cases) NC 02/07/19 (two cases) |
processed. |
|
NC 03/07/19 (four cases) |
|
|
NC 09/07/19 (two cases) |
|
|
NC 10/11/19 (two cases) |
|
|
NC 06/02/20 (two cases) |
|
|
39 cases involved |
|
|
NC 11/04/19 (one case) |
Evidence recovery and sample processing. The contamination was due to the ma e samples were handled. |
|
NC 20/04/19 (one case) |
|
|
NC 08/06/19 (one case) |
|
|
NC 02/01/20 (one case) |
|
|
Four cases involved |
|
|
NC 03/06/19 Two cases involved |
Tissue isolation laboratory. The contamination was due to utensils not properly sanitised. |
|
DNA finding pending, on receiving retake of buccal samples |
|
|
NC 06/06/19 (one case ) NC 07/06/19 (one case) NC 12/06/19 (one case) NC 13/06/19 (one case) Four cases involved |
Collection/submission step of buccal samples. The contamination was due to the manner, in which the samples were handled. |
A summary of the interventions and quality control implemented, for the 52 DNA samples that were identified as contaminated, is reflected in the table below:
|
Finding |
Intervention |
Quality control measures |
|
In 49 of the 52 cases, additional samples (uncompromised) were available to process and provide the DNA findings. |
An investigation was conducted in respect of each contamination, to determine the root causes and corrections to be made. |
A risk assessment was done to determine all risks within the area where the contamination occurred. Daily monitoring of the risks has been implemented and trends in this area, is closely monitored. |
Reply to question 1582 recommended
GENERAL NATIONAL COMMISSIONER: SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE
KJ SITOLE (SOEG)
DATE: 2020/08/18=9
Reply to question 1582 approved
MINISTER OF POLICE
GENERAL BH CELE, MP
Date: 26/08/2020