The code of ethics was developed to give a guide to practitioners, students and customers of forensic scientists. It sets down in plain English what is expected of a forensic practitioner in examining evidence, giving results and providing evidence in court.

Scientific Method

1. Accepted scientific principals and methods should be utilised unless a particular investigation requires the use of a novel method.
2. Appropriate methods should be used having regard to the standard of proof that is required and that can be reasonably achieved.
3. Objectivity should be maintained at all times, from when examining scenes and collecting items for further examination, to reaching conclusions based on available evidence.
4. Relevant experimental controls should be used and, where appropriate, results verified by retesting or by the application of additional or alternative techniques.
5. Examination should not be taken beyond the limits of one's expertise.
6. Where applicable, the physical results of tests, field notes, test notes, reports and photographs should be retained for as long as possible or at least during the currency of any relevant legal proceedings.

Reporting

1. Distinctions should be made between the results of tests and examinations, and opinions based on these. Any pertinent limitations to the test results and conclusions should be explained.
2. Opinions should be expressed in simple, precise and unambiguous terms.
3. Where test results or conclusions are capable of being interpreted to the advantage of either side in a legal proceeding, each result or conclusion should be given weight according to its merit.
4. There should be a preparedness to concede that other opinions, being contrary to or at variance with one’s own can be honestly held.
5. Reference should be made in the report to all items examined or tested.
6. The nature and character of all tests and examinations should be available to the court.
7. Reports will be signed only by the persons who have either carried out the work described or have directly or indirectly supervised it.

Pre-Trial Conduct

1. Every endeavour should be made to produce the report in sufficient time before the relevant legal proceedings so as to enable proper consideration of it, provided that sufficient notification of the date of legal proceedings has been received.
2. On the understanding that there is no property in expert scientific witnesses, the prospective witness should be reasonably available for discussion with professional representatives of all parties involved with the proceedings.
3. Any retainer offered should be refused if it is suspected that a purpose of the offer is to prevent relevant evidence being presented to a Court.

Conduct in Court

1. As far as possible, simple terms should be used when giving evidence.
2. Any attempt made to press the witness to testify as to matters beyond and/or outside their expertise should be firmly resisted.
3. An objective and moderate manner in giving evidence should be cultivated.
4. In the conduct of giving evidence the witness, upon request, is under an obligation to disclose all tests and experiments performed, subject to the directions of the presiding judicial officer.
5. The witness should plainly state opinions as such and take care to distinguish them from statements of fact.
6. The witness should appeal to presiding judicial officer (in the absence of the jury if the trial be by judge and jury) if they believe that the manner in which evidence is being elicited is such to prevent the disclosure of a significant relevant matter or circumstance.

General Matters

1. It is proper to advise a lawyer concerning the reports and evidence of another expert even though such advice may be used in the cross-examination of that expert. To this end, co-operation in the provision of notes/records should be given with, if desired, the proviso of open consultation and discussion with the reviewing expert.
2. Confidential information received should not be inappropriately disclosed.
3. Media association of an expert’s name with specific cases or accomplishments, or association of one’s name with developments, publications or organisations with which that expert played no significant part, should be discouraged.
4. Professional and personal behaviour consistent with membership of a skilled profession should be observed and colleagues treated with due respect and inappropriate criticism of them avoided.
5. No services should be rendered where the fee is dependent on the outcome of the examination.
6. Errors or omissions discovered prior to, during or after any hearing should be disclosed.