Fundamental to the justice system is the ability of any person involved in court proceedings to comprehend any allegations put to them, and to clearly understand any subsequent court hearings. In order to deliver this for those whose first language is not English, each month an average of 17,000 bookings for interpreters in over 150 languages are provided by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) through a private provider.
The House of Lords Public Services Committee inquiry into Interpreting Services in the Courts took evidence from court officials, barristers, solicitors, the MoJ and interpreters themselves. We found a real disconnect between what the government hopes is happening, what the language companies believe is happening and what front-line workers report is happening with interpreting in the courts.
Although official statistics indicate that only 1% of cases involving an interpreter are subject to complaint, the evidence gathered during our inquiry leads us to believe that there are significant problems throughout the process, and the current state of interpreting services in the courts is not working as efficiently and effectively as it should.
Current data published by the MoJ masks these problems in the service due to both data omissions, and a complaints process which causes under-reporting of issues with interpreting. The MoJ’s data seems to conflict with the reports we received from those working in the courts. Accurate information is vital, and the government must take steps to improve the quality and consistency of the data gathered and publish it in a way that is accessible and easily understood. This should include data on the number and proportion of cases which are delayed due to problems in interpreting services.
Read more
To ensure the quality of interpreting, the MoJ contract out assessments of interpreters’ ability. Interpreting is a difficult job and assessing quality has inherent challenges, but the current assessment process is inappropriate for use in too many court settings, including whispered interpreting or closed courts such as family courts. This means that assessment data may miss interpreter errors and how this may have affected judgments.
The MoJ must close these loopholes and should publish more information about the problems identified, the nature of the problems and the number of cases where judges took further actions after issues were raised.
We found low awareness as to how the complaints system operates, and a failure to make the complaints system accessible in languages other than English and Welsh means that it is inaccessible to those who may need it most. The government must increase awareness of the complaints systems, clarifying where responsibility sits for submitting complaints about interpreting services in courts and making the complaints process more accessible for non-English speakers.
Our report concludes that the current data collection, quality assurance and complaints systems lead to a significant under reporting of problems and could threaten the effectiveness of some court cases.
All that said, everyday there are many highly qualified, excellent interpreters, successfully helping to deliver justice in the courts. The interpreter workforce is fundamental in bringing about the improvements that we want to see. Interpreting is a competitive field, and demands highly-qualified, expert professionals.
However, the evidence points to a significant crisis in the recruitment and retention of these professionals. Low and opaque pay, a lack of control over earnings, poor remuneration for cancelled or delayed bookings and a lack of professional respect is leading too many interpreters to seek work elsewhere.
The committee also considered how court interpreting may be able to take advantage of current and future technology, to improve the services that users experience. We found that at a time when the country is embracing AI and the digital world, the courts find themselves hampered by an infrastructure which makes it difficult to effectively use existing technology, let alone to prepare for what might come next.
All these problems are solvable. The MoJ is currently in the process of negotiating a new contract for Interpreting Services in the Courts and it must seize the opportunity to solve the problems outlined in our report and to reform the service. Failure to do so really could mean that justice for some, is indeed lost in translation.
Read the report here
Baroness Morris of Yardley is chair of the House of Lords Public Services Committee
No comments yet