• Tue
  • Dec 23, 2014
  • Updated: 9:21am
NewsHong Kong

Poor quality of court translations puts justice at risk, experts warn

PUBLISHED : Monday, 14 October, 2013, 12:00am
UPDATED : Monday, 14 October, 2013, 8:52am

The administration of justice could be at risk because of the poor quality of part-time court interpreters, say two legal and translation professionals.

A barrister who speaks Punjabi says he notices flaws in court interpretation on almost every occasion when the professional service is required.

And a linguist specialising in court interpretation blames the judiciary's recruitment process and unsatisfactory remuneration, which can be as low as a tenth of the market rate for experienced translators.

She also censures the judiciary for being reluctant to introduce an accreditation system to ensure quality.

The critical appraisal of the standard of court interpretation came after the High Court in August, because of errors made by an interpreter, quashed the conviction of a Pakistani man jailed for creating a bomb.

In that case, an interpreter wrongly translated the term "with intention to induce".

"I often interrupt the interpreter and suggest a better alternative immediately without letting the matter get out of hand," the Punjabi-speaking barrister said.

One example he cited was the lack of a Punjabi word for "appeal". He had heard an interpreter repeating the term in English to the defendant. He said it was not uncommon for judges to show signs of impatience as the interpreters translated questions and responses.

Ester Leung Sin-man, who sits on the advisory committee of the Multilingual Interpreters and Translators Association, said: "It is at the court level where interpreters are found not really delivering their best services.

"But before the trial, it could be even more horrible."

Leung, a trainer of court interpreters, said the judiciary managed Chinese-English interpretation well, but the handling of ethnic-minority languages was disappointing.

She had "serious doubts" about the judiciary's screening process for new, part-time recruits. Candidates took a brief translation test and the exam invigilators might not be able to speak the language being assessed, she said.

For unusual languages, the judiciary might even fail to find an interpreter, she said. In 2010, a hearing involving the murder of a Mongolian was adjourned after an interpreter failed to turn up.

"I have been asking the government to set up an accreditation system to provide interpreters with proper channels to be trained and to be qualified to do the job," she said. "But of course it's not happening. It seems to me that they don't like to see changes. And they are worried that it might cost them money.

"They are saying that this is not the majority [of people] anyway," Leung said, adding that the judiciary seemed to ignore the fact that an appeal could be even more costly.

She suggested the judiciary make use of information technology to tap into the pool of accredited court interpreters overseas. An interpreter who is physically in another country could work through videoconferencing, she said.

Leung says part-time court interpreters are paid HK$250 an hour. The fixed pay is a disincentive, as interpreters are not remunerated according to their ability.

Outside courts, she says, freelance interpreters are paid more than HK$700 an hour and the experienced get HK$2,500.

The judiciary keeps a list of 377 part-time interpreters for 57 languages and dialects, including 206 for Asian and Middle Eastern tongues and 16 for African ones.


For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive



This article is now closed to comments

Well, this is a bitter truth of Nepali interpreters too. Most of the interpreters do not have a firm grasp of both the languages such as Nepali or English. The problem should lie with the procedures of recruitment. Hong Kong Judiciary employs people based on their basic English standards, and it does not have any mechanism to test their first language such as Nepali or Punjabi, their ability to translate contents from first language to second language. They make it so cheap that they don't even want to employ an expert in two languages such as English plus Nepali or English plus Urdu or Nepali. So, the Judiciary does not know whether the candidates are proficient users of their own languages in written and spoken forms, and that leads to poor translations and interpretations services in Hong Kong. Poor interpretation services in court proceedings and hospitals can have serious consequences, but unfortunately, the Judiciary is just ignoring this fact.
Virtually every case requiring interpretation, whether that be by freelancers or by the Judiciary Administration's own Chinese-English interpreters, is blighted. The entire system of recruitment, training and quality supervision is broken and ought to be thoroughly overhauled. Don't expect anything to be done under the current JA, Emma Lau's leadership. She's out to lunch on this one.
Land Grab Case: Such an anomalous situation prevails in Bangalore City Civil Court, India where my versions taken in English but the judgement is in Kannada Language * which I do not know to read and write but my signature is taken on kannada language enscription, Ref. O.S.341/2004 with the Senior Division, Bangalore Rural, such a bad situation prevails within india while I served the Indian Army i.e. for the nation, my country as a whole. Judge should have realised this when I protested ut the typing was in their local language ' Kannada language '.


SCMP.com Account