Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
10 June 2020 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Supplied
Dr Ehlers was appointed to serve on the National Forensic Oversight and Ethics Board of 10 members for a second term, based on her knowledge in the field of forensic sciences.

Dr Karen Ehlers from the Department of Genetics at the University of the Free State (UFS) was elected as a member of the National Forensic Oversight and Ethics Board (NFOEB) for a second term.

Dr Ehlers has been appointed to the board of 10 members based on her knowledge in the field of forensic sciences. She is currently conducting research focusing on the forensic application of Y-STR markers, the statistical analysis of DNA profiles, and touch DNA.

Making valuable contributions
Her expertise in the field of forensic genetics assists the board – which also handles complaints about alleged violations relating to the abuse of DNA samples and forensic DNA profiles – to oversee the operations of the Forensic Science Laboratory and the National Forensic DNA Database (NFDD). 

“The knowledge I gained from my current research at the UFS has enabled me to make valuable contributions to the board and its recommendations to the Minister of Police,” says Dr Ehlers. 

In her first term as member of the Board – following regular tracking and analysis of reports, the Board noted an increase in the number of outstanding forensic investigative leads – (hits on the National Forensic DNA Database) that were not followed up.

“After we made enquiries, it was determined that the provincial task teams that were to follow up on the leads, were ad hoc structures that lacked the necessary resources. The Board addressed this shortfall by engaging with various stakeholders and helping to establish permanent structures, called Forensic Investigative Units, with dedicated resources – both human and material – to effectively follow up on all forensic DNA investigative leads. The finalised Regulations were published for comment in the Government Gazette on 27 March 2020,” says Dr Ehlers.

Lowering SA crime rate
While serving on this board, she is ensuring that South Africa has a functioning DNA database that contributes to lowering the crime rate in the country. “As a member of the board, I hope to add value to its functioning. I feel that in the future, science will play an even bigger role in crime prevention, detection, and the solving of crimes,” she states.

Dr Ehlers is Programme Director of the Forensic Sciences Programme in the Department of Genetics. She teaches the Crime Scene Management module to second-year students and supervises seven honours, five MSc, and three PhD students. 

Besides her appointment as member of the NFOEB, she values the work she is doing with her students. “The highlight of my career was when my first group of BScHons students in Forensic Genetics graduated and were shortly thereafter appointed by the Forensic Sciences Laboratory as DNA analysts,” she says. 

News Archive

Protection of Information bill- opinions from our experts
2011-11-28

Prof. Hussein Solomon
Senior Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of the Free State. 

In recent years, given their failure to effectively govern, the ANC has become increasingly defensive. These defensive traits have become particularly acute in light of the various corruption scandals that members of the ruling party involve themselves in.
 
Given the fact that for now they are assured of an electoral majority (largely on account of their anti-apartheid credentials), coupled with the fact that they have managed to make parliament a rubber stamp of the executive as opposed to holding the executive accountable, it is the media which has increasingly held the ruling party to account by exposing such corruption and incompetence in government.
 
The passing of the information bill, therefore, is not merely an attack on the media, but an attack on the pivotal issue of accountability. Without accountability, there can be no democracy.
 
By defining national interest broadly, by refusing to accept a public interest clause in the bill, the ANC increasingly shows its disdain to South Africa's constitution and its citizens.
 
More importantly, as former Minister of Intelligence and ANC stalwart Ronnie Kasrils pointedly makes clear, the ANC is also betraying its own noble struggle against the odious apartheid regime. It was the media which played a key role in exposing apartheid's excesses, it is the same media which is coming under attack by the heirs of PW Botha's State Security Council - Minister of State Security Siyabong Cwele and his security apparatchiks whose mindsets reflect more Stalin's Gulag's than the values of the Freedom Charter.
 
The passing of this bill is also taking place at a time when journalists have had their phones attacked, where the judiciary has been deliberately undermined and parliament silenced.
 
Democrats beware!

 
Prof. Johann de Wet
Chairperson: Department of Communication Science 
 
The ANC’s insistence on passing the Protection of State Information Bill in its current form and enforcing it by law, means that the essence of our democratic state and the quality of life of every citizen is at stake.
 
Yes, our freedom as academics, researchers, mass media practitioners and citizens comes into play. Freedom implies the right to choose and is, along with equality, an underlying principle which helps make democracy happen. While the South African state needs to protect (classify) information which could threaten its security and/or survival, the omission of a public interest clause in the Bill at this stage effectively denies a citizen the right to freedom of information.
 
 Freedom of information, along with press freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of association and religious freedom, are essential to democracy. These freedoms are granted because they conform to basic liberal ideas associated with (Western) democracy and which resonate with South Africa’s liberal constitution, such as (1) belief in the supreme value of the individual (and thus not of the state); (2) belief that the individual has natural rights (rights which belong to all human beings by nature – such as the right to life and to control government)) which exist independently of government, and which ought to be protected by and against government; and (3) recognition of the supreme value of the individual. 
 
One wonders how many cases of South African government corruption and mismanagement would have been uncovered by investigative journalists over the past number of years if this Bill in its current form was on the statute books. This Bill represents a backward step from the promise of democracy of having an informed public. The former National Party government had similar laws in place and one does not want to go there again. The infamous Information Scandal in South Africa of some thirty years ago, or Muldergate as it has come to be known, reminds one of what governments can do when it works clandestinely.
 
What South Africans need, is more information on what government structures are doing and how they are doing it with taxpayers’ money, not less information. While information in itself does not equal communication or dialogue, it is an indispensable part thereof, and the need for dialogue based on verifiable information is urgent for meeting vexed challenges facing South African communities. Academics in all fields of specialisation are constantly in need of untainted information to pursue answers and/or offer solutions to where South Africa should be moving in all spheres of life.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept