Authors : Dr. Ready Condry Rasekgoalo

Volume/Issue : Volume 9 - 2024, Issue 11 - November

Google Scholar : https://shorturl.at/rR1pf

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/294ajmmd

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24NOV364

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : This article explores and analyses the forensic handwriting and signatures examination findings with a view to determine its validity, reliability and the conformance to the legal requirements as outlined by the Criminal Procedure Act (Act 51 of 1977) of South Africa, hereafter referred to as the CPA. The forensic examination of handwriting and signatures is the mandate of the Questioned Documents Section (QDS) of the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL), Division: Detectives and Forensic Services of the South African Police Services (SAPS). The CPA stipulates the requirements with which an affidavit or certificate (also referred to as forensic report) is required to comply with in terms of the law. As a legal entity, the QDS, which is responsible for the examination of handwriting and signatures, is obliged to abide by the requirements of the law in order for the reports produced by the examiners to meet and pass the legal scrutiny in a court. Handwriting and signatures examination findings play a crucial role in the administration of justice during the court proceedings, and other forums such as the departmental trials, commission of enquiries, and disciplinary hearings. It is for this reason that its validity, reliability, and conformance to the law should be beyond any shadow of doubt. In this research article, the relevant documentary sources are perused, and analysed to provide context into the research topic and assist in answering the research questions. These documentary sources include the CPA, Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) on examination of handwriting and signatures (QDS0028P of 2024), published research articles, and books written by revered authorities in the field of forensic science and law. Methodological approach: This research article makes use of the qualitative research strategy to collect data that is used to highlight the current state of affairs in the forensic examination of handwriting and signatures by the QDS in South Africa. Practical experiences and data obtained from the actual forensic reports, SOPs, and relevant policies are used to provide the factual state of affairs and to highlight the strengths and the weaknesses in the current state of affairs. This research study is relevant because it deals with the current phenomenon that is in play as part of the Criminal Justice System (CJS) in South Africa. The examination of handwriting and signatures has a direct impact in the administration of justice as judges and magistrates often consider forensic reports pertaining to the examination of handwriting and signatures in their court judgement. It is based on this backdrop that this research study is important and relevant to assist in uplifting the standard of forensic reports, and to ensure that compliance to the legal requirements is not compromised. In addition, this study highlights arears that need to be improved and provides relevant and practical recommendations aimed at addressing the identified deficiencies. In addition, this research article will provide a framework for the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL), in particular the QDS, to draw council from the research findings and recommendations to best align the forensic reports. Furthermore, FSL may utilise this article as the basis for further engagement on the subject, and to ensure that compliance to the legal requirements is not compromised. The judiciary, the academics, and the public in general (both local and international) will have insight of the forensic report and its validity, reliability, and conformance to the law in South Africa.

Keywords : Noncompliance, Conformity, Criminal Justice System, Criminal Procedure Act, Forensic Services, Forensic Examination, Handwriting And Signatures, Standard Operating Procedure, Questioned Documents Section, Reporting Of Results, Report Findings, Compliance.

References :

1. Babbie, E. & Mouton, J. 2012. The practice of social research. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.
2. Bless, C. & Higson-Smith, C. 2000. Fundamentals of social research methods, an African perspective. 3^rd edition. Cape Town: Zebra Publications.
3. Found, B. 2012. Handwriting and signatures comparison. Wiley Publishing.
4. Criminal Procedure Act (Act 51 of 1977) see South Africa.
5. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. Pretoria.
6. Khan, J.A. 2008. Research methodology. New Delhi: APH Publishing Corporation.
7. State v Barlow, Deshwin. 2016. Constitutional Court, Braamfontein. CCT Case No. 233/2015.
8. Heritage, K. 1999. Successful report writing in a week. London: Headway Publishing
9. Huber, R.A., and Headrick, A.M. 1999. Handwriting identification: Facts and Fundamentals. Florida: CRC Press.
10. South African National Accreditation System. (TG 43 01), 2018. Technical guidelines for forensic ballistic, impressions and questioned document laboratories.
11. Standard Operating Procedure, 2022.
12. Questioned Documents Section (QDS0028P). Examination of handwriting and signatures. 2022. Pretoria.
13. State vs Chetty, V., Naidoo, M., Chetty, C., and Govender, R. 2016 (CASE NO: A268/2015).
14. Sulner, A. 2018. Critical issues affecting the reliability and admissibility handwriting identification opinion evidence –how they have been addressed (or not) since the 2009 NAS report and how they should be address going forward: a document examiner tells all. 4/27/2018 8:04 PM.