The forensic kit situation in the Western Cape is being badly mismanaged and requires urgent intervention.
Based on oversight visits to SAPS stations, FCS units and the Epping provisioning store, it is increasingly clear that the problem is not simply a national procurement shortage.
It is a provincial stock management, redistribution and accountability failure.
National SAPS Supply Chain Management indicates that systems exist to procure, issue, track and redistribute forensic evidence collection kits.
National SCM further indicates that stock has been issued to provinces and that DB kits, D1 kits and D7 kits are captured through the relevant provisioning processes.
However, this explanation does not match the reality being reported at station and FCS-unit level in the Western Cape.
Across multiple visits, stations and FCS units have reported that they do not receive what they request.
In several cases, members indicated that they are forced to ration kits, borrow from other units, or prioritise which cases receive certain evidence collection tools.
This is particularly serious in respect of DB kits, which are used for buccal DNA swabs, and D1 and D7 kits, which are used in sexual offence investigations.
DB kits are not rape kits.
They are used to collect DNA reference samples, including from qualifying offenders.
If these kits are not available, SAPS cannot properly swab offenders who should be linked to the National Forensic DNA Database.
This undermines the ability to link suspects to previous or future crimes.
D1 and D7 kits are sexual offence evidence collection kits. If these are unavailable or rationed, rape and sexual offence investigations are compromised at the first evidentiary step.
This directly affects victims, detectives, dockets and prosecutions.
The situation in the Western Cape is especially concerning because the Epping provisioning store had no DB kits on the shelf during the oversight visit.
National SCM’s explanation is that DB kits may not necessarily be routed through Epping, because requisitions may be captured directly against the national provisioning store and then issued directly to the provincial office or provincial SCM.
That may explain why Epping had no DB kits physically on the shelf, but it does not explain why frontline stations are still reporting shortages and rationing.
If DB kits were issued directly to the Western Cape provincial office, then the province must immediately explain where those kits are, who received them, which stations received them, how many remain, and why high-demand stations are still reporting insufficient supply.
The problem is not solved by saying stock exists somewhere in SAPS.
The only question that matters operationally is whether the correct kit is available to the officer, victim, suspect and docket at the moment evidence must be collected.
There are also serious concerns regarding D1 and D7 kits.
SAPS indicated that current stock is limited and that available stock is being managed to last for approximately the next two months, with some stock expiring on 1 August.
SAPS also indicated that the relevant supplier declined to extend the contract, reportedly because of cost increases and supply-chain pressures.
Emergency procurement and a new term contract are now being pursued.
This creates an immediate risk. If emergency procurement is delayed, or if current stock is not properly redistributed, FCS units may be left without the kits needed to process rape and sexual offence cases.
This risk is even more serious in areas where FCS units cover large geographic distances, including rural stations and units serving multiple police precincts.
The Western Cape’s provincial management system appears to be the critical bottleneck.
SAPS explained that provinces are responsible for consolidating needs, managing stock, redistributing kits and ensuring stations and FCS units are supplied.
Provinces are also expected to submit monthly physical stock certificates, signed off by the Provincial Commissioner, confirming stock availability.
That raises the central accountability issue: if the Provincial Commissioner or provincial structure certifies that stock is sufficient, while stations and FCS units report shortages, rationing and borrowing, then either the stock data is wrong, the redistribution system is failing, or the certificate is not reflecting the operational truth.
Hon Nicholas Gotsell has reportedly raised these issues with the Western Cape province previously and received no meaningful response.
That is unacceptable.
Members of Parliament, station commanders and FCS units cannot be left without answers while critical evidence collection tools are missing or not reaching the frontline.
There is also a broader concern about the functioning of the Epping provisioning store.
SAPS described Epping as an extension of national SCM and a bulk storage hub, not the final decision-maker for provincial distribution.
However, concerns were observed or raised regarding empty shelves, limited capacity, infrastructure problems, non-functioning CCTV, damaged delivery infrastructure, and alleged discipline-related challenges.
SAPS itself acknowledged that Epping requires attention, capacity and revamping.
An empty store is not automatically a problem if stock has moved to stations and units.
But an empty store becomes a serious warning sign if stations are simultaneously reporting shortages.
This issue also mirrors wider SAPS resourcing failures. Similar concerns have been raised about ordinary consumables such as paper, docket covers and other basic supplies.
In some stations, members reportedly buy their own paper.
This indicates that the problem is not limited to forensic kits. It is a broader failure to convert formal procurement and supply-chain systems into actual operational readiness.
The Western Cape province must now provide a written explanation addressing the following:
1. What quantities of DB, D1 and D7 kits were requested by the Western Cape for the 2026/27 financial year.
2. Who signed off the Western Cape needs analysis.
3. What quantities were approved and issued by national SCM.
4. Whether DB kits were issued to Epping, the provincial office, provincial SCM, or another recipient.
5. Who signed receipt of the stock.
6. Where the stock is currently located, broken down by station and FCS unit.
7. Which stations and FCS units currently have zero stock or below-minimum stock.
8. Why stations and FCS units are reporting shortages if the province has received stock.
9. Whether the Provincial Commissioner’s monthly certificates reflect actual station-level availability.
10. What disciplinary or management action will follow if stock was not redistributed timeously.
SAPS must also confirm whether every kit serial number is linked from national issue to provincial receipt, station allocation, actual use, CAS number and forensic submission.
If a kit can be written off or marked as used without a compulsory CAS link, then SAPS does not have proper end-to-end control over forensic evidence collection kits.
The Western Cape cannot continue with a system where national SCM says stock was issued, provincial structures do not respond, Epping cannot answer stations, and frontline members are left to ration or borrow kits.
This is not a victim-centred GBVF response.
It is a management failure with direct consequences for victims, evidence and prosecutions.
The province must account immediately.
The issue is simple: a DB kit in a provincial office does not help an officer who must swab an offender.
A D1 or D7 kit sitting in a store does not help a rape survivor at a station.
A forensic system that cannot show where every kit is, who received it, and whether it was linked to a case is not a functioning system.
The Western Cape SAPS management must provide answers, not excuses.