We are all con­cerned about rape and in­cest but the most im­por­tant piece of ev­i­dence to con­vict any­one of these heinous acts lies in the hand of our Pres­i­dent who is part­ly re­spon­si­ble for pro­claim­ing the DNA Act.

The Bill has passed both Hous­es since 2000 and up to this day al­most 147 years lat­er, it has not yet been pro­claimed. This is a fun­da­men­tal piece of leg­is­la­tion that is war­rant­ed in or­der to sup­port the Prime Min­is­ter's call to hold those re­spon­si­ble for not re­port­ing these heinous crimes against young girls, and more im­por­tant­ly, for the sake of pros­e­cu­tion.

Ac­cord­ing to state­ments in the Hansard, this bill had passed the Sen­ate on De­cem­ber 8, 1999 and had al­so been passed in the House of Rep­re­sen­ta­tive on May 12, 2000. But up this day and af­ter sev­er­al calls by lawyers and con­cerned cit­i­zens who are con­vinced that this piece of leg­is­la­tion is cru­cial to en­sure a con­vic­tion for rape or in­cest, it re­mains un­at­tend­ed.

Ob­vi­ous­ly it ap­pears that the Bail Bill and Sec­tion 34 has tak­en pri­or­i­ty over the DNA Act, they both have eas­i­ly won ap­proval and the Sec­tion 34 was pro­claimed in­stant­ly af­ter pass­ing. It was so ur­gent to have Sec­tion 34 pass so ex­pe­di­tious­ly that it re­sult­ed in po­lit­i­cal fi­as­co.On Sep­tem­ber 6, 2004, at­tor­ney Lar­ry Lal­la to­geth­er with at­tor­ney Kei­th Scot­land ad­vo­cat­ed strong­ly in an ar­ti­cle and em­pha­sised for the DNA Act to be pro­claimed, but their call met with deaf ears, ac­cord­ing to a me­dia ar­ti­cle.

In most cas­es of rape and in­cest, cir­cum­stan­tial ev­i­dence is not even with­in the thresh­old to ob­tain a con­vic­tion. The most con­clu­sive piece of ev­i­dence that speaks for it­self is the DNA se­men spec­i­mens that di­rect­ly match­es that of the per­pe­tra­tor. So there is less a need for wit­ness­es and di­rect tes­ti­mo­ny to sup­port the al­le­ga­tions of these heinous crimes, but there is an ab­solute ne­ces­si­ty for procla­ma­tion of the DNA Act.

Now hav­ing sup­port­ed my ar­gu­ments with the ev­i­dence out­lined here­in, I still don't see any bone fide rea­son why the procla­ma­tion lingers on with­out be­ing giv­en pri­or­i­ty. This is all in pen­den­cy while young boys and young girls are con­tin­u­al­ly per­mit­ted to be sodomised and abused in our so­ci­ety, in­clud­ing Akiel Cham­bers in an af­flu­ent neigh­bour­hood.The im­pend­ing ques­tion is why make ar­rests and why con­tin­ue to ad­vo­cate against rape and in­cest when our pros­e­cu­tors can't even con­vict the per­pe­tra­tors?

I be­lieve the Pres­i­dent is ex­pect­ed to demon­strate his sup­port for moral­i­ty and ju­rispru­dence by pro­claim­ing of the DNA Act.

Jay G Rakhar,

Mi­a­mi