Interpreter Policy
POLICY CONCERNING STANDARDS OF PROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT FOR INTERPRETERS PROVIDING SERVICES IN JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Effective January 1, 2005
I. INTRODUCTION
Many persons who come before the courts may be restricted in their ability
to fully participate in the proceedings due to limited English proficiency,
a speech impairment, hearing loss and/or deafness. It is essential that
any resulting communication barrier be removed, as far as possible, so
that these persons are placed in the same positions as similarly situated
persons for whom there is no such barrier.
Interpreters are highly skilled professionals who fulfill an essential
role in the administration of justice. As officers of the court, interpreters
help assure that such persons may enjoy equal access to justice and that
court proceedings and court support services function efficiently and
effectively. Interpreters may be privately retained or paid through public
funds.
II. GENERAL PROVISIONS
SECTION 1: APPLICABILITY
This Policy shall guide and be binding upon all persons, agencies, and
organizations who deliver interpreting services in the Maine State Courts.
Members of the public are frequently accompanied to court by family and
friends who offer support. For persons of limited English proficiency
this support can include communication with court staff and other officials.
This support, while welcomed by the court system, does not substitute
for an official interpreter. Because family members and friends who are
providing assistance are not serving as interpreters, this Policy does
not apply to them.
SECTION 2: EFFECTIVE DATE
This Policy takes effect on January 1, 2005. All persons to whom this
Policy is applicable on that date, and all persons to whom this Policy
thereafter becomes applicable, shall comply immediately with all provisions
of this Policy.
SECTION 3: DEFINITIONS
A. “Appropriate Judicial Authority” means the Director of
Services and Programs within the Administrative Office of the Courts.
B. “Presiding Officer” means the Judge, Justice, Case Management
Officer, or Mediator overseeing the proceeding.
III. STANDARDS
STANDARD 1: ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS
Interpreters shall render a complete and accurate interpretation or sight
translation, without altering, omitting, or adding anything to what is
stated or written, and without explanation.
Commentary:
The interpreter has a twofold duty: 1) to ensure that the proceedings
in English reflect precisely what was said by a non-English speaking person,
and 2) to place the non-English speaking person on an equal footing with
those who understand English. This creates an obligation to conserve every
element of information contained in a source language communication when
it is rendered in the target language.
Therefore, interpreters are obligated to apply their best skills and
judgment to preserve faithfully the meaning of what is said in court,
including the style or register of speech. Verbatim, "word for word,"
or literal oral interpretations are not appropriate when they distort
the meaning of the source language, but every spoken statement, even if
it appears non-responsive, obscene, rambling, or incoherent should be
interpreted. This includes apparent misstatements.
Interpreters should never interject their own words, phrases, or expressions.
If the need arises to explain an interpreting problem (e.g., a term or
phrase with no direct equivalent in the target language or a misunderstanding
that only the interpreter can clarify), the interpreter should ask the
presiding officer’s permission to provide an explanation. Interpreters
should convey the emotional emphasis of the speaker without reenacting
or mimicking the speaker's emotions, or dramatic gestures.
Sign language interpreters, however, must employ all of the visual cues
that the language they are interpreting for requires -- including facial
expressions, body language, and hand gestures. Sign language interpreters,
therefore, should ensure that court participants do not confuse these
essential elements of the interpreted language with inappropriate interpreter
conduct.
The obligation to preserve accuracy includes the interpreter's duty to
correct any error of interpretation discovered by the interpreter during
the proceeding. Interpreters should demonstrate their professionalism
by objectively analyzing any challenge to their performance.
STANDARD 2: REPRESENTATION OF QUALIFICATIONS
Interpreters shall accurately and completely represent their certifications,
training, and pertinent experience.
Commentary:
Acceptance of a case by an interpreter conveys linguistic competency
in legal settings. Withdrawing or being asked to withdraw from a case
after it begins causes a disruption of court proceedings and is wasteful
of scarce public resources. It is therefore essential that interpreters
present a complete and truthful account of their training, certification,
and experience prior to appointment so the officers of the court can fairly
evaluate their qualifications for delivering interpreting services.
STANDARD 3: IMPARTIALITY AND AVOIDANCE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Interpreters shall be impartial and unbiased and shall refrain from conduct
that may give an appearance of bias. Interpreters shall disclose any real
or perceived conflict of interest.
Commentary:
The interpreter serves as an officer of the court and the interpreter's
duty in a court proceeding is to serve the court and the public to which
the court is a servant. This is true regardless of whether the interpreter
is publicly retained at government expense or retained privately at the
expense of one of the parties.
The interpreter should avoid any conduct or behavior that presents the
appearance of favoritism toward any of the parties. Interpreters should
maintain professional relationships with their clients, and should not
take an active part in any of the proceedings.
During the course of the proceedings, interpreters should not converse
with parties, witnesses, jurors, attorneys, or with friends or relatives
of any party, except in the discharge of their official functions. It
is especially important that interpreters, who are often familiar with
attorneys or other members of the courtroom work group, including law
enforcement officers, refrain from casual and personal conversations with
anyone in court that may convey an appearance of a special relationship
or partiality to any of the court participants.
The interpreter should strive for professional detachment. Verbal and
non-verbal displays of personal attitudes, prejudices, emotions, or opinions
should be avoided at all times.
Should an interpreter become aware that a proceeding participant views
the interpreter as having a bias or being biased, the interpreter should
disclose that knowledge to the appropriate judicial authority and counsel.
Any condition that interferes with the objectivity of an interpreter
constitutes a conflict of interest. Before providing services in a matter,
court interpreters must disclose to all parties and presiding officers
any prior involvement, whether personal or professional, that could be
reasonably construed as a conflict of interest. This disclosure should
not include privileged or confidential information.
The following are circumstances that are presumed to create actual or
apparent conflicts of interest for interpreters where interpreters should
not serve:
- The interpreter is a friend, associate, or relative of a party or counsel
for a party involved in the proceedings;
- The interpreter has served in an investigative capacity for any party
involved in the case;
- The interpreter has previously been retained by a law enforcement agency
to assist in the preparation of the criminal case at issue;
- The interpreter or the interpreter's spouse or child has a financial
interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding,
or any other interest that would be affected by the outcome of the case;5. The interpreter has been involved in the choice of counsel or law firm
for that case.
Interpreters should disclose to the presiding officer and other parties
when they have previously been retained for private employment by one
of the parties in the case.
Interpreters should not serve in any matter in which payment for their
services is contingent upon the outcome of the case.
An interpreter who is also an attorney should not serve in both capacities
in the same matter.
STANDARD 4: PROFESSIONAL DEMEANOR
Interpreters shall conduct themselves in a manner consistent with the
dignity of the court and shall be as unobtrusive as possible.
Commentary:
Interpreters should know and observe the established protocol, rules,
and procedures for delivering interpreting services. When speaking in
English, interpreters should speak at a rate and volume that enable them
to be heard and understood throughout the courtroom, but the interpreter's
presence should otherwise be as unobtrusive as possible. Interpreters
should work without drawing undue or inappropriate attention to themselves.
Interpreters should dress in a manner that is consistent with the dignity
of the proceedings of the court.
Interpreters should avoid obstructing the view of any of the individuals
involved in the proceedings. However, interpreters who use sign language
or other visual modes of communication must be positioned so that hand
gestures, facial expressions, and whole body movement are visible to the
person for whom they are interpreting.
Interpreters are encouraged to avoid personal or professional conduct
that could discredit the court.
STANDARD 5: CONFIDENTIALITY
Interpreters shall protect the confidentiality of all privileged and
other confidential information.
Commentary:
The interpreter must protect and uphold the confidentiality of all privileged
information obtained during the course of her or his duties. It is especially
important that the interpreter understand and uphold the attorney-client
privilege, which requires confidentiality with respect to any communication
between attorney and client. This rule also applies to other types of
privileged communications.
Interpreters must also refrain from repeating or disclosing information
obtained by them in the course of their employment that may be relevant
to the legal proceeding.
In the event that an interpreter becomes aware of information that suggests
imminent harm to someone or relates to a crime being committed during
the course of the proceedings, the interpreter should immediately disclose
the information to the appropriate judicial authority who is not involved
in the proceeding and seek advice in regard to the potential conflict
in professional responsibility.
STANDARD 6: RESTRICTION OF PUBLIC COMMENT
Interpreters shall not publicly discuss, report, or offer an opinion
concerning a matter in which they are or have been engaged, even when
that information is not privileged or required by law to be confidential.
STANDARD 7: SCOPE OF PRACTICE
Interpreters shall limit themselves to interpreting or translating, and
shall not give legal advice, express personal opinions to individuals
for whom they are interpreting, or engage in any other activities which
may be construed to constitute a service other than interpreting or translating
while serving as an interpreter.
Commentary:
Since interpreters are responsible only for enabling others to communicate,
they should limit themselves to the activity of interpreting or translating
only. Interpreters should refrain from initiating communications while
interpreting unless it is necessary for assuring an accurate and faithful
interpretation.
Interpreters may be required to initiate communications during a proceeding
when they find it necessary to seek assistance in performing their duties.
Examples of such circumstances include seeking direction when unable to
understand or express a word or thought, requesting speakers to moderate
their rate of communication or repeat or rephrase something, correcting
their own interpreting errors, or notifying the court of reservations
about their ability to satisfy an assignment competently. In such instances
they should make it clear that they are speaking for themselves.
An interpreter may convey legal advice from an attorney to a person only
while that attorney is giving it. An interpreter should not explain the
purpose of forms, services, or otherwise act as a counselor or advisor
unless he or she is interpreting for someone who is acting in that official
capacity. The interpreter may translate language on a form for a person
who is filling out the form, but may not explain the form or its purpose
for such a person.
The interpreter should not personally perform official acts that are
the official responsibility of other court officials including, but not
limited to, court clerks, pretrial release investigators or interviewers,
or probation counselors.
STANDARD 8: ASSESSING AND REPORTING IMPEDIMENTS TO PERFORMANCE
Interpreters shall assess at all times their ability to deliver their
services. When interpreters have any reservation about their ability to
satisfy an assignment competently, they shall immediately convey that
reservation to the appropriate judicial authority.
Commentary:
If the communication mode or language of the non-English-speaking person
cannot be readily interpreted, the interpreter should notify the appropriate
judicial authority.
Interpreters should notify the presiding officer of any environmental
or physical limitation that impedes or hinders their ability to deliver
interpreting services adequately (e.g., the court room is not quiet enough
for the interpreter to hear or be heard by the non-English speaker, more
than one person at a time is speaking, or principals or witnesses of the
court are speaking at a rate of speed that is too rapid for the interpreter
to adequately interpret). Sign language interpreters must ensure that
they can both see and convey the full range of visual language elements
that are necessary for communication, including facial expressions and
body movement, as well as hand gestures.
Interpreters should notify the presiding officer of the need to take
periodic breaks to maintain mental and physical alertness and prevent
interpreter fatigue. Interpreters should recommend and encourage the use
of team interpreting whenever necessary.
Interpreters are encouraged to make inquiries as to the nature of a case
whenever possible before accepting an assignment. This enables interpreters
to match more closely their professional qualifications, skills, and experience
to potential assignments and more accurately assess their ability to satisfy
those assignments competently.
Even competent and experienced interpreters may encounter cases where
routine proceedings suddenly involve technical or specialized terminology
unfamiliar to the interpreter (e.g., the unscheduled testimony of an expert
witness). When such instances occur, interpreters should request a brief
recess to familiarize themselves with the subject matter. If familiarity
with the terminology requires extensive time or more intensive research,
interpreters should inform the presiding officer.
Interpreters should refrain from accepting a case if they feel the language
and subject matter of that case is likely to exceed their skills or capacities.
Interpreters should feel no compunction about notifying the presiding
officer if they feel unable to perform competently, due to lack of familiarity
with terminology, preparation, or difficulty in understanding a witness
or defendant.
Interpreters should notify the presiding officer of any personal bias
they may have involving any aspect of the proceedings. For example, an
interpreter who has been the victim of a sexual assault may wish to be
excused from interpreting in cases involving similar offenses.
STANDARD 9: DUTY TO REPORT ETHICAL VIOLATIONS
Interpreters shall report to the appropriate judicial authority any effort
to impede their compliance with any law, any provision of this Policy,
or any other official policy governing court interpreting and legal translating.
Commentary:
Because the users of interpreting services frequently misunderstand the
proper role of the interpreter, they may ask or expect the interpreter
to perform duties or engage in activities that run counter to the provisions
of this Policy or other laws, regulations, or policies governing court
interpreters. It is incumbent upon the interpreter to inform such persons
of his or her professional obligations. If, having been apprised of these
obligations, the person persists in demanding that the interpreter violate
them, the interpreter should turn to a supervisory interpreter, the appropriate
judicial authority to resolve the situation.
STANDARD 10: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Interpreters shall continually improve their skills and knowledge and
advance the profession through activities such as professional training
and education, and interaction with colleagues and specialists in related
fields.
Commentary:
Interpreters must continually strive to increase their knowledge of the
languages they work in professionally, including past and current trends
in technical, vernacular, and regional terminology as well as their application
within court proceedings.
Interpreters should keep informed of all statutes, rules of courts and
policies of the judiciary that relate to the performance of their professional
duties.
An interpreter should seek to elevate the standards of the profession
through participation in workshops, professional meetings, interaction
with colleagues, and reading current literature in the field.
Effective January 1, 2005
