Profits on the Margins: Private Language Service Providers and Limited-English-Proficient Immigrants in Irish Courts

Chapter

Abstract

Due to an unprecedented growth in immigration to Ireland in the late 1990s and early 2000s, Ireland’s foreign-born population began to rise very quickly, and it stood at the last census in 2011 at 12 % of the total population. One immediate consequence of this was a sudden and huge rise in the number of defendants with no or limited fluency in English appearing daily in Irish courts on criminal charges, a situation where courts were ill-equipped to deal with, as prior to this most language issues that arose related to the rights of Irish (Gaelic) language speakers to use this, the first national language, in court. This new demand presented a serious challenge for the criminal justice system, as well as significant new market opportunities for interpreting service providers; ultimately, the Courts Service contracted a sole service provider in an effort to rationalise and manage the situation. However, despite the willingness of the justice system to “fork out” what was seen by many as huge sums on interpreting services, despite the obvious willingness of courts to provide interpreters where required and despite the Courts Service’s claims of satisfaction with the service provided, numerous, serious and ongoing problems have been identified vis-à-vis interpreting in Irish courts, raising questions about the ability of non- or limited-English-proficient (LEP) immigrants on the margins of the justice system to access justice. This chapter is concerned with the relationship between LEP defendants, courts and language service providers, and it sets out to examine how the grey area between the rights of these defendants to understand and participate in their defence and the obligations of courts to ensure a fair trial combines with a focus of the criminal justice system on the efficiency and management of interpreting services rather than their quality, to facilitate increased profit margins for private service providers.

Keywords

Transportation Expense Arena Acoustics Havoc 

References

  1. €15m is lost in translation by the courts. (2006, January 20). Irish Independent.Google Scholar
  2. ACHR (American Convention on Human Rights). (1969, November 22). 1144 U.N.T.S. 123 (entered into force July 18, 1978).Google Scholar
  3. Bacik, I. (2007). Breaking the language barrier: Access to justice in the new Ireland. Judicial Studies Institute Journal, 2, 109.Google Scholar
  4. Barner-Barry, C. (1986). An introduction to nonparticipant observational research techniques. Politics and the Life Sciences, 5(1), 139.Google Scholar
  5. Berk-Seligson, S. (2002). The bilingual courtroom: Court interpreters in the judicial process: With a new chapter. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bottoms, A. E. (1995). The philosophy and politics of punishment and sentencing. In C. Clarkson & R. Morgan (Eds.), The politics of sentencing reform. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  7. Byrne, R., & McCutcheon, J. P. (2009). The Irish legal system. Dublin: Bloomsbury Professional.Google Scholar
  8. Colin, J., & Morris, R. (1996). Interpreters and the legal process. Winchester: Waterside.Google Scholar
  9. Coulter, C. (2003, March 10). The trials of foreigners translate into a difficulty. Irish Times.Google Scholar
  10. Council Directive 2010/64/EU, 2010 O.J. (L280) 26.Google Scholar
  11. Courts Service. (2005). Highlighting Ireland’s ethnic diversity, Annual report. Dublin: Courts Service.Google Scholar
  12. Courts Service. (2007). Annual report. Dublin: Courts Service.Google Scholar
  13. Courts Service. (2008a). Annual report. Dublin: Courts Service.Google Scholar
  14. Courts Service. (2008b). Interpreters keep the message clear (Courts Service News, July). Dublin: Courts Service.Google Scholar
  15. Courts Service. (2012). Request for tenders (“RFT”) for provision of managed interpretation services. Retrieved August 16, 2012, from http://www.etenders.gov.ie/.
  16. CSO (Central Statistics Office). (2002). Census 2002 results.Google Scholar
  17. CSO (Central Statistics Office). (2006). Census 2006 results.Google Scholar
  18. CSO (Central Statistics Office). (2011). Census 2011 results.Google Scholar
  19. de Jongh, E. M. (1991). Foreign language interpreters in the courtroom: The case for linguistic and cultural proficiency. The Modern Language Journal, 75(3), 285.Google Scholar
  20. Deegan, G. (2006, November 22). Costs are soaring as more interpret in court. Irish Independent.Google Scholar
  21. Donaghy, K. (2004, May 3). Trying times for courts as translation costs soar. Irish Independent.Google Scholar
  22. ECHR (European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms). (1950, November 4). 213 U.N.T.S. 221, 226 (entered into force September 3, 1953).Google Scholar
  23. Edwards, A. B. (1995). The practice of court interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  24. Fuehrer, U. (2008). Cowboys and Indians, ITIA February Bulletin.Google Scholar
  25. Felle, T. (2005, August 17). €550,000 payout for court interpreters. Irish Independent. Google Scholar
  26. Garland, D. (2001). The culture of control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Gartland, F. (2010, March 27). Professional fees for criminal legal aid work cut by 8%, Irish Times.Google Scholar
  28. Gibbons, J. (2003). Forensic linguistics: An introduction to language in the justice system. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
  29. Goodrich, P. (1987). Legal discourse: Studies in linguistics, rhetoric and legal analysis. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  30. Granger, E., & Baker, M. (2003). The role and experience of interpreters. In R. Tribe & H. Raval (Eds.), Working with interpreters in mental health. Hove: Brunner/Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Growing demand exposes poor translation service. (2007, April 27). Irish Times.Google Scholar
  32. Guerin, S. (2004). Criminal practice: The use of interpreters and translators in the Irish courts. Bar Council conference on Criminal Procedure, Dublin.Google Scholar
  33. Hayes, E. (2007). Editorial: October issue of the ITIA bulletin. Dublin: ITIA.Google Scholar
  34. Heffernan, B. (2006, June 6). Recruitment of court interpreters is put in the dock! Irish Independent. Google Scholar
  35. Hertog, E. (Ed.). (2001). Aequitas: Access to justice across language and culture in the EU. Antwerp: Lessius Hogeschool.Google Scholar
  36. Holmquist, K. (2006, March 14). Act now, while times are good. Irish Times.Google Scholar
  37. HRC (United Nations Human Rights Committee). (1994, April 8). General Comment No. 23, The Rights of Minorities (Art. 27), U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.5 at para. 5.3.Google Scholar
  38. ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights). (1966, Dec. 16). Art. 14. G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), 21 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 52, U.N. Doc. A/6316, 999 U.N.T.S. 171, (entered into force March 23, 1976).Google Scholar
  39. ITIA (Irish Translators’ and Interpreters’ Association). (2002). Submission to the working group on the jurisdiction of the courts. Dublin: ITIA.Google Scholar
  40. ITIA (Irish Translators’ and Interpreters’ Association). (2008a). January issue of the ITIA bulletin. Dublin: ITIA.Google Scholar
  41. ITIA (Irish Translators’ and Interpreters’ Association). (2008b). Submission on the courts service statement of strategy 2008–2011. Dublin: ITIA.Google Scholar
  42. ITIA (Irish Translators’ and Interpreters’ Association). (2011). February issue of the ITIA bulletin. Dublin: ITIA.Google Scholar
  43. Judge attacks low standards of translators. (2004, January 2004). Irish Independent.Google Scholar
  44. Kilcommins, S., O’Donnell, I., O’Sullivan, E., & Vaughan, B. (2004). Crime, punishment and the search for order in Ireland. Dublin: Institute of Public Administration.Google Scholar
  45. Krings, T., Bobek, A., Moriarty, E., Salamonska, J., & Wickham, J. (2009). Migration and recession: Polish migrants in post-Celtic Tiger Ireland. Sociological Research Online, 14(2).Google Scholar
  46. Lally, C. (2009, April 29). Interpreter system poor-GRA, Irish Times.Google Scholar
  47. Morris, R. (1998). Great mischiefs: An historical look at language legislation in Britain. In D. A. Kibbee (Ed.), Language legislation and linguistic rights. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  48. Morris, R. (1999). The face of justice: Historical aspects of court interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting, 4(1), 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Morris, R. (2010). Court interpreting 2009: An undervalued and misunderstood profession? Or: Will justice speak? Monographs on Translation and Interpreting, 2, 47–79.Google Scholar
  50. NCCRI (National Consultative Committee on Racism and Interculturalism). (2007). Interpreting, translation and public bodies in Ireland: The need for policy and training (Advocacy Paper 5). Dublin: NCCRI.Google Scholar
  51. NCCRI (National Consultative Committee on Racism and Interculturalism) & Office of the Minister for Integration. (2008). Developing quality, cost-effective interpreting and translating services for Government service providers in Ireland. Dublin: NCCRI.Google Scholar
  52. O’Brien, C. (2006, April 4). Are we lost in translation? Irish Times.Google Scholar
  53. O’Brien, C. (2010, June 7). No quality controls laid down for courts and Garda translators. Irish Times.Google Scholar
  54. O’Brien, C. (2010a, June 7). Hundreds of court, Garda interpreters have no qualification. Irish Times. Google Scholar
  55. O’Donnell, I. (2005). Crime and justice in the Republic of Ireland. European Journal of Criminology, 2(1), 99–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. O’Mahony, P. (2002). Criminal justice research in Ireland. Dublin: Institute of Public Administration.Google Scholar
  57. O’Malley, T. (2009). The criminal process. Dublin: Round Hall—Thomson Reuters.Google Scholar
  58. O’Brien, J. (2007, July). Courts body to fork out £2 m on interpreters as demand rises. Irish Independent. Google Scholar
  59. Phelan, M. (2005). The courts service interpreting tender: June issue of the ITIA bulletin. Dublin: ITIA.Google Scholar
  60. Phelan, M. (2006, June 9). Letter: Interpreting in the courts. Irish Times.Google Scholar
  61. Phelan, M. (2007). Court interpreters in the news (for the wrong reasons): October issue of the ITIA Bulletin. Dublin: ITIA.Google Scholar
  62. Riegel, R. (2001, May 14). Translator shortage causes havoc in court schedules. Irish Independent. Google Scholar
  63. Riordan, J. D. (2007). Immigrants in the criminal courts. Judicial Studies Institute Journal, 2, 95.Google Scholar
  64. Rottman, D. B. (1984). The criminal justice system: Policy and performance. Dublin: National Economic and Social Council.Google Scholar
  65. Tiersma, P. M. (1993). The judge as linguist. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 27, 269.Google Scholar
  66. Tighe, M. (2009, March 29). Interpreters in court pay row, Irish Times.Google Scholar
  67. Trechsel, S. (2005). Human rights in criminal proceedings. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Waterhouse, K. (2010). Limited English proficient (LEP) immigrants in Ireland’s district criminal court (Doctoral dissertation, Trinity College Dublin).Google Scholar

Cases

  1. R. v. Kwok Leung and Others [1909] Hong Kong L.R. 161Google Scholar
  2. R. v. Lee Kun [1916] 1 K.B. 337Google Scholar
  3. United States ex rel. Negron v. the State of New York, 434 F.2d 386 (2nd Cir. 1970).Google Scholar
  4. Kamasinski v. Austria, App. No. 9783/82, 168 Eur. Ct. H. R. (Ser. A) (1989, December 19).Google Scholar
  5. R. West London Youth Court, Ex p. N [2000] 1 W.L.R. 2368, [2000] 1 All E.R. 823Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Law Office of Michael G DowdNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations