Advertisement

Translation Institutions: War Crimes Tribunals

  • Ellen Elias-Bursać
Chapter

Abstract

The viability of international criminal prosecution and adjudication hinges in no small part on the massive amounts of translation and interpreting required in order to run these lengthy, complex trials. Translators and interpreters must negotiate their own loyalties and biases whenever they translate. But when a translator or an interpreter is negotiating meaning in the context of a war in which he or she has a personal stake, within an institution where confidentiality and security are concerns of the highest order, questions of trust and loyalty become unusually visible. This chapter considers manifestations of institutional efforts to shape an atmosphere of trust for the language professionals working there amid the adversarial context of the courtroom, using examples taken from courtroom interactions.

References

  1. Almqvist, J. 2006. “The Impact of Cultural Diversity on International Criminal Proceedings.” Journal of International Criminal Justice 4: 745–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker, C. 2012. “Prosperity without Security: The Precarity of Interpreters in Postsocialist, Postconflict Bosnia-Herzegovina.” Slavic Review 71 (4): 849–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker, M. 2010. “Interpreters and Translators in the War Zone: Narrated and Narrators.” The Translator 16 (2): 197–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Borger, J. 2016. The Butcher’s Trail: How the Search for Balkan War Criminals Became the World’s Most Successful Manhunt. New York: Other Press.Google Scholar
  5. Cruvellier, T. 2014. The Master of Confessions: The Making of a Khmer Rouge Torturer. Trans. A. Gilly. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  6. Der Kévorkian, Isabelle. 2008. The ATA Chronicle. Web. Accessed August 1, 2017. http://www.atanet.org/chronicle/feature_article_february2008.php.
  7. Draženović-Carrieri, M. 2002. “BCS—A Practical Approach.” In Lexical Norm and National Language: Lexicography and Language Policy in South-Slavic Languages after 1989, ed. R. Lučić, 49–52. Munich: Verlag Otto Sagner.Google Scholar
  8. Elias-Bursać, E. 2015. Translating Evidence and Interpreting Testimony at a War Crimes Tribunal: Working in a Tug-of-War. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Elias-Bursać, E. 2016. Pushing Back: Witnesses and Translation in the Radovan Karadžić Trial. Getuigen tussen geschiedenis en herinnering, 123.Google Scholar
  10. Gaiba, F. 1998. The Origins of Simultaneous Interpretation: The Nuremberg Trial. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hepburn, P. 2012. “The Translation of Evidence at the ICTY: A Ground-breaking Institution.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 7 (1): 54–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Karton, J. 2008. “Lost in Translation: International Criminal Courts and the Legal Implications of Interpreted Testimony.” Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 31: 1–54.Google Scholar
  13. Kelsall, T. 2009. Culture under Cross-Examination: International Justice and the Special Court for Sierra Leone. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Klarin, Mirko. 2004. “The Tribunal’s Four Battles.” Journal of International Criminal Justice 2: 546–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. May, R., D. Tolbert, J. Hocking, K. Roberts, B. Jia, D. Mundis, and G. Oosthuizen, eds. 2001. Essays on ICTY Procedure and Evidence: In Honour of Gabrielle Kirk McDonald, 167–176. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  16. Mišković-Luković, Mirjana, and Mirjana Dedaić. 2012. “The Discourse Marker Odnosno at the ICTY: A Case of Disputed Translation in War Crime Trials.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (10): 1355–1377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Namakula, C. 2012. “Language Rights in the Minimum Guarantees of Fair Criminal Trial.” The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 19 (1): 73–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nikolić, M. 2005. Proteus 14 (1): 1, 6–8. Available online. http://www.najit.org/membersonly/library/Proteus/2005/Proteus%20Spring%202005.pdf.
  19. Pavetić, J. 2012. “Interview with Greiss Lecturer Marijana Nikolić.” SlavFile: Newsletter of the Slavic Languages Division 21 (4): 6–7, 9.Google Scholar
  20. Schweda Nicholson, N. 2010. “Interpreting at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY): Linguistic and Cultural Challenges.” In The Translator as Mediator of Cultures, ed. H. Tonkin and M. Frank, 37–52. London: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Seren-Rosso, M.L. 2009. Language Matters at The Hague. ITI Bulletin, 7–9.Google Scholar
  22. Stahuljak, Z. 2009. “Interpreters in and of the War.” In Critical Readings in Translation Studies, ed. M. Baker, 391–414. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Stern, Ludmila. 2001. “At the Junction of Cultures: Interpreting at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in the Light of Other International Interpreting Practices.” The Judicial Review 5 (3): 255–274.Google Scholar
  24. Swigart, L. 2015. “African Languages in International Criminal Justice: The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and Beyond.” In Promoting Accountability under International Law for Gross Human Rights Violations in Africa: Essays in Honour of Prosecutor Hassan Bubacar Jallow, ed. C. Jalloh and A. Marong, 578–611. The Hague: Brill Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Swigart, L. 2017. “Linguistic and Cultural Diversity in International Criminal Justice: Toward Bridging the Divide.” Pacific Law Journal 48 (2): 197–218.Google Scholar
  26. Takeda, K. 2010. Interpreting the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal: A Sociopolitical Analysis. Ottawa: Universe of Ottawa Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tomić, A. 2010. Behind the Scenes: The Registry of the International Criminal Court. Available online. https://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/PIDS/docs/behindTheSce.pdf.
  28. Tomić, A., and A. Montoliu. 2013. Translation at the International Criminal Court. New Trends in Translation Studies 1 (4): 221–242. Edited by A. Albi and F. Ramos.Google Scholar

Suggestions for Further Reading

  1. Baker, C. 2012. “Prosperity without Security: The Precarity of Interpreters in Postsocialist, Postconflict Bosnia-Herzegovina.” Slavic Review 71 (4): 849–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Elias-Bursać, E. 2015. Translating Evidence and Interpreting Testimony at a War Crimes Tribunal: Working in a Tug-of-War. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Elias-Bursać, E., and L. Askew. 2018. Translation and International Justice. Routledge Handbook of Translation and Politics: 177–192.Google Scholar
  4. Gaiba, F. 1998. The Origins of Simultaneous Interpretation: The Nuremberg Trial. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.Google Scholar
  5. Hepburn, P. 2012. “The Translation of Evidence at the ICTY: A Ground-breaking Institution.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 7 (1): 54–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Stahuljak, Z. 2009. “Interpreters in and of the War.” In Critical Readings in Translation Studies, ed. M. Baker, 391–414. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Swigart, L. 2017. “Linguistic and Cultural Diversity in International Criminal Justice: Toward Bridging the Divide.” Pacific Law Journal 48 (2): 197–218.Google Scholar
  8. Takeda, K. 2010. Interpreting the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal: A Sociopolitical Analysis. Universe of Ottawa Press.Google Scholar

Links

  1. The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia: https://www.eccc.gov.kh/en.Google Scholar
  2. The International Criminal Court: https://www.icc-cpi.int/.Google Scholar
  3. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda: http://unictr.unmict.org/.Google Scholar
  4. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia: http://www.icty.org/.Google Scholar
  5. The Special Court for Sierra Leone: http://www.rscsl.org/.Google Scholar
  6. The Special Tribunal for Lebanon: https://www.stl-tsl.org/en/.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ellen Elias-Bursać
    • 1
  1. 1.Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies, Harvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations