TIME: Almanac 1993/TIME Almanac 1993.iso/time/052989/05298900.018

Text File | 1992-09-23 | 3.7 KB | 72 lines

                                                                                LAW, Page 65

Libertad and Justicia for All


A shortage of interpreters is leaving the courts speechless


    "Equal Justice Under Law," reads the motto atop the U.S.
Supreme Court building. The words are lofty, but for the
thousands of people who trudge through the criminal-justice
system daily and who speak no English, the phrase means
literally nothing. For many of these defendants, the words are
also legally empty. American justice for those who do not
comprehend English is anything but uniform, let alone
understandable. There are no nationwide standards for court
interpreters, little training and virtually no monitoring.
"Everybody gets a piece of due process," says David Fellmeth,
a senior court interpreter in New York City. "But how big a
piece depends on the interpreter."

    Horror stories regularly fill court dockets. In a New York
federal court, a translated undercover wire quotes a Cuban
defendant: "I don't even have the ten kilos." The defendant
means kilos of currency (Cuban cents), but the translated
statement suggests kilograms of drugs. In a New Jersey homicide
trial, the prosecutor asks whether the testimony of a witness
is lengthier than the translation. "Yes," responds the Polish
interpreter, "but everything else was not important."

    Congress tried to surmount the language barriers in the
federal courts by passing legislation eleven years ago
authorizing Government-paid interpreters for those who do not
speak English. So far, though, only 308 people have passed the
rigorous Spanish-only federal certification process -- a cadre
far too small to handle the 43,000 annual requests for
interpreters in 60 languages. The situation in the states is
bleaker. Last year Cook County, Ill., processed 40,000 requests,
and the New York courts sought out interpreters 250 times a day.
As in the federal system, Spanish is the language most in
demand.

    Only a handful of states test their interpreters for
language skills. Thus in many local courts, translation may be
a free-lance project for the secretary who speaks a little
French or a favor requested from a relative of the defendant.
"A family member is the worst person you can use," says Maureen
Dunn, an interpreter for the deaf. "They have their own side of
the story, and they add and omit things." Besides,
interpretation is a sophisticated art. It demands not only a
broad vocabulary and instant recall but also the ability to
reproduce tone and nuance and a good working knowledge of street
slang. "Most people believe that if you are bilingual, you can
interpret," says Jack Leeth of the Administrative Office of the
U.S. Courts. "That's about as true as saying that if you have
two hands, you can automatically be a concert pianist."

    Professional interpreters are among the first to admit the
sad state of translation in the courts. They are often relegated
to clerical status, with low pay, and asked to work without time
to prepare. Says New York interpreter Gabriel Felix: "We could
use a central administrator, dictionaries and in some courts a
place to hang our coats, a chair and a desk."

    Some jurisdictions are trying to make improvements. New
York and New Jersey are broadening their testing and sending
their interpreters to school for further training. The Federal
Government is working on new requirements for Navajo and
Haitian-Creole interpreters. And in Los Angeles a federal
lawsuit is demanding certified interpreters in immigration
proceedings. For now, however, the quality of court interpreting
around the country depends on the luck of the draw.