Text in Afrikaans / "Free people expect much from their police. In such societies the police stand at the point of balance on the one hand securing human rights on the other exercising their lawful powers given to them by Governments in the name of the people, to protect people and their institutions" (J Alderson Human Rights and Police Rights. Publication of the Council of Europe.) This is no small expectation. It means that the police are expected to maintain and secure the principles of democracy and human rights, the principles upon which our Constitution is based. At the same time it is the duty of a police service to maintain law and order which sometimes require the exercise of power and the use of force which on the face of it may appear to violate human dignity and certain rights and freedoms which a police force is expected to maintain in a democratic society. The manner of exercising that power has an impact on the credibility and effectiveness of the police. Human rights law internationally accepts that a police service needs to be given the power to, at times restrict certain individual freedoms in the interests of the security of the community at large. These restrictions may take place only in a constitutional way. If it takes place in an unconstitutional way the courts must have the right to exclude evidence which is unconstitutionally obtained. At this stage the courts have to formulate such a qualified exclusionary rule, but the ultimate goal must be to include such an exclusionary rule in a future Constitution. / Department of Criminal & Procedural Law / LL.M.

Text in Afrikaans / "Free people expect much from their police. In such societies the police stand at the point of balance on the one hand securing human rights on the other exercising their lawful powers given to them by Governments in the name of the people, to protect people and their institutions" (J Alderson Human Rights and Police Rights. Publication of the Council of Europe.) This is no small expectation. It means that the police are expected to maintain and secure the principles of democracy and human rights, the principles upon which our Constitution is based. At the same time it is the duty of a police service to maintain law and order which sometimes require the exercise of power and the use of force which on the face of it may appear to violate human dignity and certain rights and freedoms which a police force is expected to maintain in a democratic society. The manner of exercising that power has an impact on the credibility and effectiveness of the police. Human rights law internationally accepts that a police service needs to be given the power to, at times restrict certain individual freedoms in the interests of the security of the community at large. These restrictions may take place only in a constitutional way. If it takes place in an unconstitutional way the courts must have the right to exclude evidence which is unconstitutionally obtained. At this stage the courts have to formulate such a qualified exclusionary rule, but the ultimate goal must be to include such an exclusionary rule in a future Constitution. / Department of Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.M.

Increasing use is being made of various types of scientific evidence in court. The general requirement for the admissibility of such evidence is relevance. Although expert evidence is considered to be opinion evidence, it is admissible if it can assist the court to decide a fact in issue; provided that it is also reliable. In South Africa, the initial wide judicial discretion to either admit or exclude unconstitutionally obtained evidence, has developed into a more narrowly defined discretion under the final Constitution. Examples of scientific evidence, namely, DNA evidence, fingerprints, psychiatric evidence, bite-mark evidence and polygraph evidence are considered and problems inherent in the presentation of such evidence in courts in various jurisdictions are highlighted. An investigation of the presentation and evaluation of evidence in both the accusatorial and inquisitorial systems seems to indicate that the adversarial procedure has a marked influence on the evaluation of evidence / Criminal & Procedural Law / LL.M. (Law)

Increasing use is being made of various types of scientific evidence in court. The general requirement for the admissibility of such evidence is relevance. Although expert evidence is considered to be opinion evidence, it is admissible if it can assist the court to decide a fact in issue; provided that it is also reliable. In South Africa, the initial wide judicial discretion to either admit or exclude unconstitutionally obtained evidence, has developed into a more narrowly defined discretion under the final Constitution. Examples of scientific evidence, namely, DNA evidence, fingerprints, psychiatric evidence, bite-mark evidence and polygraph evidence are considered and problems inherent in the presentation of such evidence in courts in various jurisdictions are highlighted. An investigation of the presentation and evaluation of evidence in both the accusatorial and inquisitorial systems seems to indicate that the adversarial procedure has a marked influence on the evaluation of evidence / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.M. (Law)