Nuremberg in Madrid: provision of interpreting services during the Madrid train bomb trial

Anne Martin, University of Granada, Spain

Juan Miguel Ortega Herráez, University of Alicante, Spain – GRETI Research Group

The high profile trials of the 2004 Madrid train bomb attacks mark a watershed in the history and development of court interpreting in Spain. Traditionally, court interpreting arrangements in Spain have been less than adequate, with few enforceable requirements regarding training and accreditation of those involved. However, during the train bomb trials simultaneous interpreting was used for the first time in a Spanish courtroom (outside the Basque country) and utmost care was taken to ensure that the interpreters working at this mega-trial were experienced, trained professionals with knowledge of the different dialectal variations of Arabic spoken by the defendants and witnesses.

Moreover, translation became a major issue at the trial as the principal defendant was acquitted in part due to the deficient translation of a conversation originally in Arabic and which constituted the main evidence leading to the charges brought against him.

In this paper we will analyse the structure and organization of the interpreting services that were put into place for this trial, both in the courtroom and behind the scenes, exploring the possible reasons why such care was taken to ensure a quality service and what the possible effects may be for court interpreting in Spain in the future. We will also discuss the role assumed by the interpreters and the role ascribed to them by the legal professionals who depended on them. The results of the wide visibility given to the interpreting process through mass media coverage will also be referred to.

Translation and interpretation for the Portuguese courts

Anne Brunke, University of Coimbra, Portugal

Pursuant to article 92, no. 1 of the Portuguese Code of Criminal Procedure the language used at any procedural act, written or oral, is Portuguese. The procedural acts in which this rule is violated are considered void. Therefore, each court is required to provide, at judiciary expense, a translator/interpreter in judicial proceedings for a party who speaks only or primarily a language other than Portuguese.

Unfortunately, there is no official selection procedure at Portuguese Courts for legal translators/interpreters, which can jeopardize the citizens’ fundamental right to use their mother tongue in court and can therefore lead to unfair trials.

The current circumstances do not absolutely guarantee the Right to liberty and security and the Right to a fair trial of the Convention for the protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Consequently, it is of fundamental importance to alert the Portuguese authorities to the fact that the creation of a classification scheme for legal translators/interpreters is indispensable.

The establishment of a European Legal Interpreters and Translators Association and the creation of a European Master’s degree in Translation (EMT) in Portugal will certainly be of great advantage to the implementation of higher expertise in the field of translation/interpretation within the Portuguese legal system.

The right to free access to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings: Spanish panorama

Mar Jimeno-Bulnes, Professor of Procedural Law (University of Burgos, Spain) and Temporary Magistrate at Burgos Provincial Court

The fundamental right to free interpretation and translation is examined here in the light of both European and national legislation as well as judicial practice in Spain. From the first perspective, we should take into account the new Proposal for a Council Framework Decision presented by the European Commission on July 8th, 2009 on the provision of the right to free interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings in the Member States of the European Union; for this reason a short commentary on it is proposed, due to its significance as well as its future implementation in national legislations. From the second perspective a more exhaustive approach to the legal panorama currently in force in domestic law in Spain will be presented. Here the exposition of Spanish regulation in the Criminal Procedural Act will take place as well as Spanish judicial experience on this point in the courts; special attention will be paid to certain questions and possible dilemmas that are perhaps of greatest interest due to jurisprudence existing from the highest courts such as the Supreme and Constitutional Court. At last, some succinct final considerations will be exposed.

Who can monitor the court interpreter’s performance? Results of a case study

Bodil Martinsen, Handelshøjskolen, Aarhus Universitet

This paper presents the results of a case study of an unusual interpreting event in a Danish courtroom setting. During the trial, the interpreter’s non-normative performance was explicitly criticised by the audience and the conflict about her competence was negotiated. Because of this unusual constellation, combined with a multi-method approach, this single case study can shed some light on the question of the participants’ ability to monitor the interpreter’s performance.

Legal professional users of interpreters tend to assume that they are able to monitor and thus evaluate the interpreting if the foreign language used in court belongs to the major ones within the Danish educational system, like English or French, contrary to “exotic” migrant languages. This paper highlights the problem that the interpreted proceedings are far less transparent for the legal participants than they normally assume. This problem, in turn, stresses the importance of a) the interpreter’s competence and self-awareness and b) the use of check interpreters.