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

Reaction by the Rector of the UFS after a meeting with student leaders
2008-02-25

Reaction by the Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS, Prof. Frederick Fourie, on the agreement reached at a meeting with student leaders held on Friday, 22 February 2008

Note: This is meant to be used together with the full joint statement that was issued by the UFS management and student leaders on 22 February 2008.

The memorandum of the primes of the University of the Free State’s (UFS) residences was handed to top management on Wednesday, 20 February 2008. In the memorandum they asked for a meeting with the UFS management by Friday, 22 February 2008. Such a meeting was arranged and took place.

The UFS top management, all the residence primes as well as the house committee member for first years, the executive of the Main Campus Student Representative Council (SRC) and residence heads were present.

In contrast to what is suggested in the Volksblad report of Saturday, the discussion went off very well. There was no consternation or shouting or “emotions that ran high”. It was a civilised, decent meeting as it should be at a good university. Of course, now and again individuals spoke out strongly and very enthusiastically, but it was all decent and orderly. The contribution of the primes was insightful and well formulated.

Because the top management and I wanted to listen very carefully what the problems and frustrations were, we spent nearly five hours in the meeting. The issues in the memorandum were discussed one by one. In some cases I could take a decision immediately and finalise the matter, in other cases, the management provided information that could largely finalise a matter. A number of other matters must be investigated further.

The management undertook to respond comprehensively and in writing to all the issues raised in the memorandum by Monday, 25 February 2008. This will be handed to the primes but will not be handed to the media beforehand.
It is obvious that there are matters at the university that can be better managed and that there are problems with communication within the Student Affairs division. A major change such as the new policy on diversity places huge demands on management and the administration, and problems were to be expected. However, we understand the frustration of the students in residences.

On the other hand, students don’t always make matters easier. The strong opposition of white student leaders last year, and their unwillingness to co-operate in preparation for 2008 is well known. This year it is going better. But often student leaders take positions that are very inflexible. They also see no room for adapting old habits and simply want their own way. Their contributions are then full of statements such as “It cannot be done”. This delays measures such as the full implementation of expert interpreting services, which, for the management, is a very important measure (and which is functioning very well in certain residences). Communication from student leaders to management is also not always what it should be.

At the end of the meeting student leaders and management reached an important agreement and issued a joint statement in which they committed themselves to the integration process and to good co-operation and communication. This was an important step which is a sign of rebuilding trust. Naturally everyone will still have to work hard to build on this and to strengthen mutual trust.

The course and outcome of Friday’s discussions, as requested by the student leaders, show that issues can be addressed and resolved by means of us talking to one another. This is why it is so sad that primes and house committee members went on strike on Wednesday already and stayed in tents in front of the Main Building – leaving their residences without its leadership. This created an opening for what appears to have been well planned and co-ordinated acts of vandalism by inhabitants of residences on the campus on Wednesday.

Such vandalism is unacceptable and no one can justify it.

Fortunately, order could be restored quickly during the night and all academic activities could resume without any disruption on Thursday and Friday.

FCvN Fourie

Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za   
24 February 2008

 

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