A first-time court appearance can be frightening, but for someone who does not speak English as their first language it could be incomprehensible. The terminology and the process can seem strange enough to someone who is not familiar with the
A first-time court appearance can be frightening, but for someone who does not speak English as their first language it could be incomprehensible.
The terminology and the process can seem strange enough to someone who is not familiar with the legal field. Attorneys and judges go to great lengths to explain the process to all parties involved, but a language barrier presents a different problem.
The court is alerted when there appears to be a language barrier with a defendant or witness. They may speak English well enough to get by on Kaua‘i, but to better understand their rights and the proceedings, the judge appoints an interpreter to ensure equal access and a constitutional right to due process.
In recent 5th Circuit cases, attorneys have raised questions about interpreters. In one case, it was unclear if a question was raised about an immigrant Filipino defendant and whether he was asked his dialect. A Tagalog interpreter was appointed, a common second language in Hawai‘i. But the attorney said the regional dialect of the defendant was Ilocano.
It turned out the defendant did speak Tagalog fluently. However, if had he not, then the judge may have been concerned that the proceedings would be over-simplified, allowing the defendant to respond, but not fully understanding his rights and consequences of options.
U.S. Census data says that just 73 percent of people in Hawai‘i speak only English. More than 26 percent speak at least one other language.
The 2010 Census reports that 13.7 percent of Kaua‘i residents are foreign-born, as are 17.7 percent of state residents.
Around 57 percent of Hawai‘i residents who speak another language say they also speak English very well. Around 26 percent say they speak English well, 15 percent not so well, and 2 percent not at all.
The Pacific Island languages lead all first-languages spoken in Hawai‘i at 7.9 percent. Tagalog, Japanese, Chinese, Spanish, Korean and Vietnamese round out the rest of the predominant languages.
Other measurable first-languages spoken in the state include Laotian, Thai, Portuguese, German and French.
Registered court interpreters recommend that a person unable to understand their interpreter raise their hand or make some sign that they don’t understand what is being said or happening. The same goes for people talking to a police officer during an arrest or while making a report at the scene of an accident.
Kaua‘i Police Department has access to local interpreters. They also use telephone interpreters when one is not available in person. The goal is to improve equal access for limited-English proficient, deaf and hard-of-hearing defendants and witnesses.
The State Supreme Court adopts the rules for certification of spoken and sign language interpreters. Eligibility is determined with written and oral examinations for English proficiency or sign language. There is also an ethics test and a criminal background check.
Once cleared, the applicant is issued a certificate of court interpreter tier status and placed on the court interpreter registry. They are selected by island courts as available when needed.
Tier 1 is a registered basic interpreting. Tier 2 and Tier 3 are more advanced but on a conditionally approved status.
Tier 4 and Tier 5 present strong simultaneous translating skills and are recognized with a national certification. Tier 6 is a certified master translator with advanced simultaneous and consecutive translation skills.
The State Judiciary conducts Court Interpreter Certification workshops to prepare applicants for a written English proficiency test and basic ethics exam. Applicant must be at least 18 years old, authorized to work in the United States, speak English and at least one other language, and pass a criminal background check.
On June 27 the Hawai‘i Supreme Court amended its rules for certification of interpreters. It now reads that when making an appointment, a court “should” (deleting “may”) give preference to court certified interpreters within that circuit.
This fell short of recommendations set by National Association of Judiciary Interpreters and Translators. The Seattle-based organization with 1,100 members and a Hawai‘i chapter recommended alternative language of “shall” give preference to the highest qualified and tier designation.
NAJIT Advocacy Committee Chairman John M. Estill stated in a letter to the court that the rule as stated allows “judicial whim” on interpreter decisions. He said the difficulties with finding qualified interpreters should not result in loosening standards.
The Hawai‘i Registry of interpreters shows that the majority of qualified interpreters live in the First Circuit. Estill said his concern is that courts prioritize on-island searches over looking for the highest qualified interpreter on any of the islands.
Hawai‘i Interpreter Action Network President Marcella Alohalani Boido, a certified court interpreter of Spanish and English, said the court is undermining its own initiatives with the certification program. She recommends a mandate for courts to select higher tier interpreters when possible.
She said the rule change conflicts with the guiding principles of the Supreme Court’s own polices set in 1995. It state’s court goals of equal access for deaf and limited English proficient immigrants.
Boido says the amended rule should provide for “evaluating the gravity of a court proceeding; the geographical location of the court; the rareness of a language; the jeopardy a party is placed in; the availability of the most qualified interpreters; and cost.”
The issue could be about travel costs. It could be that the court doesn’t see eye to eye with the interpreter organizations and doesn’t want to limit its options with selection.
If the bottom line is placing value on skilled interpreters, then interpreter advocates fear that individual courts setting standards of on-island availability. They present a decade of input from the legal and medical fields that have instituted professional interpreter standards.
For now the court will determine on a case-by-case basis that its interpreters meet the standards they set in the spirit of its comprehensive certification program.
• Tom LaVenture, staff writer, can be reached at 245-3681 (ext. 224) or tlaventure@thegardenisland.com.
