The Assessment of Expert Evidence on DNA in Malaysia

Ramalinggam A. Rajamanickam, Mohd Safri Mohammed Na'Aim, Tengku Noor Azira Tengku Zainudin, Zainunnisaa Abd. Rahman, Mohd Zamre Mohd Zahir, Muhammad Hatta

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

One of the most common forms of evidence used by the Public Prosecutor in a courtroom to prove a case is DNA evidence. The DNA evidence process started when the police collected the physical evidence relevant to the alleged offence at the crime scene. The collected evidence will then usually be sent to the Department of Chemistry Malaysia for DNA analysis. The chemist will extract the DNA from the relevant physical evidence by using specific techniques. The outcome of the analysis will be used to complete the investigation of the case. Being an independent organization, the Chemistry Department strives to provide impartial forensic science analysis. Thus, from the analysis, sometimes DNA evidence does not necessarily implicate the accused with the alleged offence but may also disclose the involvement of a third party in the alleged offence that may cast doubt on the prosecution's case. This can be seen in the Federal Court's case of Public Prosecutor v Hanif Basree Abdul Rahman [2008] 4 CLJ 1. The evidence will then be presented by the prosecution before the court to assist judges in making the right decisions. This indicates the important role played by an expert in the court decision making process. In this context, questions always arise as to the probative value of DNA evidence given by experts in the courtroom. Can the court convict a person solely on DNA evidence? This article focuses on the position of DNA experts in Malaysia under section 45 of the Evidence Act 1950. It was found that although the DNA evidence is given by the experts, the probative value depends on the nature of the evidence itself.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)51-57
Number of pages7
JournalAcademic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies
Volume8
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2019

Fingerprint

Malaysia
expert
DNA
evidence
offense
genetic test
forensic science
prosecution
Expert Evidence
DNA Evidence
chemistry
crime
chemist
decision making process
accused
decision making
court decision
Values
analysis
court

Keywords

  • DNA evidence
  • Evidence Act 1950
  • expert evidence
  • probative value

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
  • Social Sciences(all)
  • Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)

Cite this

The Assessment of Expert Evidence on DNA in Malaysia. / A. Rajamanickam, Ramalinggam; Na'Aim, Mohd Safri Mohammed; Tengku Zainudin, Tengku Noor Azira; Abd. Rahman, Zainunnisaa; Zahir, Mohd Zamre Mohd; Hatta, Muhammad.

In: Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, Vol. 8, No. 2, 01.07.2019, p. 51-57.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{82694951e26e4e868f83b344eb9e428d,
title = "The Assessment of Expert Evidence on DNA in Malaysia",
abstract = "One of the most common forms of evidence used by the Public Prosecutor in a courtroom to prove a case is DNA evidence. The DNA evidence process started when the police collected the physical evidence relevant to the alleged offence at the crime scene. The collected evidence will then usually be sent to the Department of Chemistry Malaysia for DNA analysis. The chemist will extract the DNA from the relevant physical evidence by using specific techniques. The outcome of the analysis will be used to complete the investigation of the case. Being an independent organization, the Chemistry Department strives to provide impartial forensic science analysis. Thus, from the analysis, sometimes DNA evidence does not necessarily implicate the accused with the alleged offence but may also disclose the involvement of a third party in the alleged offence that may cast doubt on the prosecution's case. This can be seen in the Federal Court's case of Public Prosecutor v Hanif Basree Abdul Rahman [2008] 4 CLJ 1. The evidence will then be presented by the prosecution before the court to assist judges in making the right decisions. This indicates the important role played by an expert in the court decision making process. In this context, questions always arise as to the probative value of DNA evidence given by experts in the courtroom. Can the court convict a person solely on DNA evidence? This article focuses on the position of DNA experts in Malaysia under section 45 of the Evidence Act 1950. It was found that although the DNA evidence is given by the experts, the probative value depends on the nature of the evidence itself.",
keywords = "DNA evidence, Evidence Act 1950, expert evidence, probative value",
author = "{A. Rajamanickam}, Ramalinggam and Na'Aim, {Mohd Safri Mohammed} and {Tengku Zainudin}, {Tengku Noor Azira} and {Abd. Rahman}, Zainunnisaa and Zahir, {Mohd Zamre Mohd} and Muhammad Hatta",
year = "2019",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2478/ajis-2019-0016",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "51--57",
journal = "Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies",
issn = "2281-3993",
publisher = "Sciendo",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Assessment of Expert Evidence on DNA in Malaysia

AU - A. Rajamanickam, Ramalinggam

AU - Na'Aim, Mohd Safri Mohammed

AU - Tengku Zainudin, Tengku Noor Azira

AU - Abd. Rahman, Zainunnisaa

AU - Zahir, Mohd Zamre Mohd

AU - Hatta, Muhammad

PY - 2019/7/1

Y1 - 2019/7/1

N2 - One of the most common forms of evidence used by the Public Prosecutor in a courtroom to prove a case is DNA evidence. The DNA evidence process started when the police collected the physical evidence relevant to the alleged offence at the crime scene. The collected evidence will then usually be sent to the Department of Chemistry Malaysia for DNA analysis. The chemist will extract the DNA from the relevant physical evidence by using specific techniques. The outcome of the analysis will be used to complete the investigation of the case. Being an independent organization, the Chemistry Department strives to provide impartial forensic science analysis. Thus, from the analysis, sometimes DNA evidence does not necessarily implicate the accused with the alleged offence but may also disclose the involvement of a third party in the alleged offence that may cast doubt on the prosecution's case. This can be seen in the Federal Court's case of Public Prosecutor v Hanif Basree Abdul Rahman [2008] 4 CLJ 1. The evidence will then be presented by the prosecution before the court to assist judges in making the right decisions. This indicates the important role played by an expert in the court decision making process. In this context, questions always arise as to the probative value of DNA evidence given by experts in the courtroom. Can the court convict a person solely on DNA evidence? This article focuses on the position of DNA experts in Malaysia under section 45 of the Evidence Act 1950. It was found that although the DNA evidence is given by the experts, the probative value depends on the nature of the evidence itself.

AB - One of the most common forms of evidence used by the Public Prosecutor in a courtroom to prove a case is DNA evidence. The DNA evidence process started when the police collected the physical evidence relevant to the alleged offence at the crime scene. The collected evidence will then usually be sent to the Department of Chemistry Malaysia for DNA analysis. The chemist will extract the DNA from the relevant physical evidence by using specific techniques. The outcome of the analysis will be used to complete the investigation of the case. Being an independent organization, the Chemistry Department strives to provide impartial forensic science analysis. Thus, from the analysis, sometimes DNA evidence does not necessarily implicate the accused with the alleged offence but may also disclose the involvement of a third party in the alleged offence that may cast doubt on the prosecution's case. This can be seen in the Federal Court's case of Public Prosecutor v Hanif Basree Abdul Rahman [2008] 4 CLJ 1. The evidence will then be presented by the prosecution before the court to assist judges in making the right decisions. This indicates the important role played by an expert in the court decision making process. In this context, questions always arise as to the probative value of DNA evidence given by experts in the courtroom. Can the court convict a person solely on DNA evidence? This article focuses on the position of DNA experts in Malaysia under section 45 of the Evidence Act 1950. It was found that although the DNA evidence is given by the experts, the probative value depends on the nature of the evidence itself.

KW - DNA evidence

KW - Evidence Act 1950

KW - expert evidence

KW - probative value

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85069956786&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85069956786&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2478/ajis-2019-0016

DO - 10.2478/ajis-2019-0016

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85069956786

VL - 8

SP - 51

EP - 57

JO - Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies

JF - Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies

SN - 2281-3993

IS - 2

ER -