Published on 10/01/2025
Dr. Sylvester Onzivuwa, Uganda’s top pathologist, opposed the government’s plan to hand the Directorate of Government Analytical Laboratory (DGAL) control over forensic evidence Services citing the agency’s lack of competence and capacity to handle sensitive cases like rape and murder effectively.
Speaking before Parliament’s Defence and Internal Affairs Committee on January 7, 2024, Onzivuwa questioned DGAL’s ability to produce the scientific forensic evidence required to prove rape cases in court.

“I am one of eight experts trained in managing rape cases in Africa. In court, rape must be proven with specific evidence. DGAL lacks the capacity to determine whether a hymen was ruptured. They can only confirm the presence of spermatozoa or genetic material, which alone does not prove rape. Collaborative evidence is essential, yet DGAL will not disclose its limitations,” Onzivuwa asserted.
Wilson Kagwengye (Nyabushozi County) suggested hiring doctors for DGAL to address the expertise gap. “It is our responsibility to empower government institutions to meet their mandates. If DGAL lacks the necessary resources or expertise, we must ensure they are supported and improved,” Kagwengye argued.
However, Onzivuwa disagreed, emphasizing that evidence for justice stems from initial police reports and medical examinations, with DGAL playing a secondary role in evidence analysis.
“When rape occurs, the first point of reference is the hospital. Are we going to place hospitals under DGAL? It has never worked anywhere,” Onzivuwa emphasized.
While presenting on the Forensic Evidence Bill, 2024, Onzivuwa proposed establishing an independent national forensic agency to regulate forensic services, citing potential conflicts of interest under the proposed DGAL framework.
“A legal framework is needed to establish a national forensic committee, similar to the UK’s Forensic Science Regulator Act. This committee would oversee DGAL, police forensic services, and the Ministry of Health, as some forensic areas fall beyond DGAL’s expertise,” he recommended.
Onzivuwa also highlighted DGAL’s deficiencies in handling poisoning cases, stating, “Dealing with poison involves medical diagnosis and management. The National Poison Centre should be under the Ministry of Health, with DGAL providing technical support. DGAL lacks medical personnel for accurate diagnoses.”
He cited mishandled cases, including the conviction of a man for 40 years based on flawed forensic evidence. In the Hussein Akbar Godi case, DGAL claimed a 99% soil match between the crime scene and the suspect’s shoe, a scientifically unfounded claim.
Onzivuwa also referenced the case of lawyer Robina Kiyingi, where DGAL failed to detect poison in a postmortem analysis. When samples were retested in South Africa, a lethal drug, Lidocaine, was identified, contradicting DGAL’s findings.
He further cited the controversial handling of Cerinah Nebanda’s death in 2012, which led him to send samples to South Africa due to concerns over DGAL’s competence.
The pathologist criticized DGAL for misleading Parliament in 2022 by requesting UGX 2 billion for a machine supposedly capable of determining a person’s exact age, a device he claims does not exist.
“I presented in Australia last year and consulted global experts. Such a machine does not exist. Parliament must benchmark forensic standards globally to avoid becoming a laughing stock,” Onzivuwa warned.
The government had tabled the Forensic Evidence Bill, 2024, aiming to streamline forensic services, designate DGAL as the regulatory body, and establish a national DNA database. However, Onzivuwa criticized the bill for focusing narrowly on criminal evidence rather than the broader forensic landscape, suggesting it be renamed the “Government Analytical Laboratory Bill.”
Onzivuwa urged Parliament to conduct extensive research and benchmarking before enacting the legislation to ensure Uganda’s forensic standards meet international norms.