Update 2014:

 

June 2014:President calls adjournment because of absence of interpreter 'unacceptable'

Lack of Slovak interpreters a 'concerning state of affairs'

The President of the Family Division, Sir James Munby, has called the adjournment of children proceedings because of the absence of a Slovak interpreter an unacceptable state of affairs.

In Re J and S (Children) [2014] EWFC 4, the President was considering an application by a father and a mother for leave pursuant to section 47(5) of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 to oppose the making of adoption orders in relation to two of their children, J and S, boys born respectively in 2010 and 2012. The parents are Roma from the Slovak Republic. The parents also applied for the transfer of the proceedings to the Slovak Republic in accordance with Article 15 of the Regulation commonly known as Brussels II revised (BIIR).

HHJ Murdoch QC transferred the prospective adopters' adoption applications to the High Court and directed that they be listed before the President and directed that "HMCTS do provide 2 Slovak interpreters for the hearing on 7 May 2014."

That hearing was unable to proceed because no interpreter was present at court.

The President said:

"It would have been unjust, indeed inhumane, to continue with the final hearing of applications as significant as those before me – this, after all, was their final opportunity to prevent the adoption of their children – if the parents were unable to understand what was being said."

The hearing was adjourned to 15 May 2014. The President directed that HMCTS was to provide two interpreters for that hearing and that Capita's Relationship Director file a written statement (with statement of truth) explaining the circumstances in which and the reasons why no interpreters had been provided by Capita for the hearing on 7 May 2014.

The President referred to three aspects of the statement by Capita's Relationship Director:

"The contractual arrangements between Capita and the interpreters do not give Capita the ability to require that any particular interpreter accepts any particular assignment, or even to honour any engagement which the interpreter has accepted. ... The second is that it is only at 2pm on the day before the hearing that Capita notifies the court that there is no interpreter assigned. The third is the revelation that on 7 May 2014 Capita had only 29 suitably qualified Slovak language interpreters on its books (only 13 within a 100 miles radius of the Royal Courts of Justice) whereas it was requested to provide 39 such interpreters for court hearings that day."

The President continued:

"This is on any view a concerning state of affairs. If the consequence is that a hearing such as that before me on 7 May 2014 has to be abandoned then that is an unacceptable state of affairs. It might be thought that something needs to be done.

"Whether the underlying causes are to be found in the nature of the contract between the Ministry of Justice and HMCTS or whoever and Capita, or in the nature of the contract between Capita and the interpreters it retains, or in the sums paid respectively to Capita and its interpreters, or in an inadequate supply of interpreters (unlikely one might have thought in a language such as Slovak), I do not know. We need to find out."

The judgment and a summary by Sally Gore of Fenners Chambers, dealing with the substantive issues, are here.

1/6/14 more:
www dot familylawweek dot co dot uk / site.aspx?i=ed129846

--

January 2014: Exactly two years after the MoJ signed that fateful contract with Capita Translation and Interpreting (formerly ALS), a contract that as we all know resulted in more than 2,000 UK interpreters leaving the profession instead of collaborating towards their own professional destruction, IAPTI pays a tribute to those interpreters who are still resisting to this day.
source : International Association of Professional Translators and Interpreters (IAPTI) 13.680 members

Interpreters' question new agreement / Friday, 11 May, 2012

The Ministry of Justice's privatization and outsourcing of interpreting services is proving to be more costly and inefficient than the services they replaced according to Professional Interpreters for Justice.

On 30 January, court interpreting services were outsourced to a single commercial agency, Applied Language Solutions Ltd, owned by Capita, to cover the justice sector in England and Wales. Previously interpreters were booked from the National Register where they had been subject to security checks and a rigorous registration procedure, and were required to have postgraduate level qualifications.

According to a recent survey carried out by Involvis on behalf of SPSI and APCI, up to 90% of Registered Public Service Interpreters refuse to work under the new system, citing reasons including poor quality, unacceptably low standards and questionable numbers of workers. The first three months of the contract have demonstrated that the agency is struggling to provide an acceptable service.

 

According to a Crime Line survey, in April 40% of cases requiring an interpreter were disrupted due to no interpreter attending.

(https://www.dropbox.com/s/vla6uuiahnj99lj/interpreter%20survey%20results.doc These are the facts and not what the interpreters are claiming)

Consequently, suspects risk being released into the open, and defendants are unnecessarily remanded in custody. Victims and witnesses have to go through traumatic experiences several times. In April, Judge Toby Hooper QC at Worcester CC had to apologise to a Polish defendant for having to adjourn his case for a fourth time. He told him, "I am ashamed of the system which fails yet again to provide an interpreter for you."

Several police forces are already using the new system and officers have been shocked by its inefficiency. An officer of West Midlands Police has written on the interpreter web site

linguistlounge.org, "On Wednesday I was trying to get a Polish interpreter for a murder inquiry and was told there was none available until Thursday! It's a joke..."

An Involvis report claims that losses from failed court hearings, adjournments and applications for Wasted Court Orders are mounting and will cost the public purse much more than £18 million ALS claimed to save. It has been calculated that the Magistrates' Courts alone are costing an extra £3 million a week; a trial collapsed in Snaresbrook Crown Court in April due to an interpreter mistake, costing an estimated £25-30,000. ALS workers have been sent hundreds of miles, on one occasion from Newcastle to Ipswich for a hearing that lasted eight minutes.

Chief executive of Fair Trials International Jago Russell says, "When Britons are arrested abroad we correctly expect their basic rights to be respected. We must not, at the same time, neglect the rights of foreign nationals in our own legal system."

A recent article on BBC London news revealed that interpreters' personal data has been stolen by ALS, where ALS/Capita holds their details on its database without consent, and a mass complaint has been made to the ICO for data theft. A recent article on BBC London news revealed that interpreters' personal data has been stolen by ALS, where ALS/Capita holds their details on its database without consent, and a mass complaint has been made to the ICO for data theft. Geoffrey Buckingham, Chairman of the APCI

said to the BBC, "Interpreters feel as though they have been used like cannon fodder, with their details being bought and sold like some kind of commodity".

Interpreters' representative bodies including PIA, SPSI, APCI and SOMI are calling for checks as to the true identity and vetting status of ALS/Capita workers, as they are receiving "the most alarming reports of organised crime infiltrating the ALS/Capita recruitment process, which appears unregulated."

A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: "There have been an unacceptable number of problems in the first weeks of the contract and we have asked the contractor to take urgent steps to improve performance."

Interpreters have put forward proposals for cost effective and quality assured alternatives for discussion, which have been rejected out of hand by the MoJ. But they are united in their struggle to uphold the right of access to justice for all and are expressing in clear and ever stronger terms their rejection of the FWA.

souce: http://www.police-life.co.uk/2012/05/11/interpreters-question-new-agreement

Maybe one day there will be a European frame for interpretation. Today every country has its way of doing and organizing interpretation services for justice police and health purposes. Best practices exchange as in other sectors seem not to be a habit yet. Translators and Interpreters associations have events and some exchange, but benchmarking, presentations and comparisons of systems seems to be an exception. I interpreted for some training sessions for the English, Greek and French NHS , translated for audits in to German so well in France, UK, and in Germany.