Introduction
Court proceedings in magistrate and other superior courts in Sierra Leone are generally conducted in English, the official language of court proceedings in the country. But the reality is that majority of the people using the courts in the provinces are not comfortable with the lingua franca of the courts. They feel more at ease using their mother tongue; thus the need for court interpreters. In the absence of court interpreters, most litigants cannot comfortably make their cases and are often exposed to embarrassment, ridicule and intimidation during cross-examination by counsel. As a result, some of them may prefer to remain silent which keeps the truth untold thereby impeding justice. This communication barrier becomes a major hurdle in the administration of justice and may also contribute in perverting justice. This is the situation that obtains in the cities of Bo and Makeni.
Who is a Court Interpreter?
The expression ‘court interpreter’ could be defined as a person who possesses the ability to orally translate speech between parties speaking different languages in a court trial. Section 23(5e) of the Constitution of Sierra Leone, 1991 provides that a person charged with a criminal offence shall be accorded, without payment, the assistance of an interpreter if such person cannot adequately understand the language of the court.. However, the same did not say who an interpreter is. Additionally, the SLCMP is not aware of any practiced direction issued by the Chief Justice to that effect. Nonetheless, since the work of an interpreter is an administrative function, it should therefore be the responsibility of the court’s registry.
The constitutional provision for an interpreter is couched in the fair trial provision to protect the rights of the accused. The essence is to ensure that the accused understand the proceedings so that when such person starts testifying, he will not implicate himself and will also be able to respond to the issues raised thereafter. Moreover, the assistance of an interpreter serves the purpose of expediting proceedings thus ensuring fair and speedy trial. However, the objective of having interpreters will only be met if the interpreter is competent or legally mandated to interprete proceedings in a court of law.
Fair Trial Rights of Accused Persons
Based on the laws governing fair trial (national and international), courts must provide interpreters in trials so that the accused or witness will be able to follow proceedings. For instance, Article 14(3) f of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) provides that persons charged with criminal offence should be entitled to free assistance of an interpreter during trials if such persons cannot speak the language of the court. Similarly so in Sierra Leone, the provision of an interpreter as provided for in section 23(5) does not only cover the time of arrest, it also sufficiently covers the trial proceedings as well. The fundamental principle is to ensure fair trial by way of protecting the right of the accused and in addition to expediting the trial process. Furthermore, the availability of an interpreter also enhances equality of arms, another provision for fair trial. The role of interpreters under the above circumstances is thus indispensable in the administration of justice. In applying the principle of equality of arms, both parties in the litigation process should be afforded opportunities before the law to present their own side of the story with none enjoying any undue advantages over his opponent by virtue of a tendency to be much more clearly heard and understood by the arbitrator.
To this end, this article seeks to assess the role played by court interpreters against the backdrop of the administration of justice in the District magistrate courts in the cities of Bo and Makeni.
The Tale of Bo
The SLCMP experience in Bo shows that even tough the court provides interpreters, however, the quality of interpretation is poor and inadequate. This is as a result of the fact that persons providing interpretations are either untrained to handle the complex court scenario or they are overwhelmed with other functions at a time. For instance, in Magistrate Court No.1 clerks who serve as court recorders also double as interpreters. In other words, during court proceedings, court clerks take notes as well as interpret for the court. The situation is even worse in Magistrate Court No. 2 presided over by Justices of the Peace, where the interpreter, an employee of the Bo District Council, is paid Le 1000 (one thousand Leones) by litigants in order to interpret for them. The problem here is not only about the fact that the litigants are not suppose to pay, it is also about the fact that the interpreter, who is an employee of another institution, may not be available at all times. Consequently, proceedings are adjourned whenever the interpreter is not around thereby prolonging the trial process.
The Tale of Makeni
In Makeni the lack of qualified interpreters has been a major cause for delays in proceedings as well as source of intimidation and embarrassment for litigants. Like in Bo, court clerks in Makeni also often serve as interpreters. More startling is the fact that Police prosecutors also serve as interpreters. The duty of the Police is to represent the Inspector General of Police in prosecuting criminal matters and not to interpret for the court. It is the responsibility of the court’s registry to provide litigants with interpreters where it is absolutely necessary. It is unreasonable for a prosecutor to translate on a matter he is prosecuting. Thus, prosecutors acting in the capacity of translators tremendously erode the rights of the accused to a fair trial as the accused is at the mercy of the interpreter who might have the tendency to inform the court what the accused did not mean to say. This practice has increased the rate of bribery and corruption by serving as a means of intimidating and extorting money from litigants.
Furthermore, when a court clerk doubles as an interpreter, it also affects his other duties of recording the proceedings, filing documents and assisting the Bench. Further worsening the matter is that interpreters only choose to translate in cases they have interest in either because of personal relationship with litigants or because of an anticipated ‘palm greasing’ at the end of the proceedings.
Implications for Justice
The implications for justice here is that cases, because of lack of interpreters, are frequently adjourned for lengthy periods thus violating the right of an accused to a speedy trial. Furthermore, in instances where prosecutors interpret, one cannot be certain of the way in which it is done as the interest of most prosecutors is to ensure that accused persons are found wanting of crimes alleged rather than protecting their rights. Court clerks, by performing other duties may also be neglecting other important functions that may be equally important to ensure fair and expeditious trial. In effect, the accused person’s right is compromised if he is not given a qualified interpreter. Consequently, people prefer to take their cases to the local courts where they are allowed to express their grievances in their native dialect
Conclusion and Recommendation
The Sierra Leone judiciary needs to provide guidelines to enhance fairness and consistency in translation process. In order to enhance this, the following is worth considering:
Every magistrate court and superior courts throughout the country should have trained interpreters. The fact that every field of study has it own language, it makes it more compelling for the judiciary to have trained personnel in the different Sierra Leonean languages to serve as interpreters. When the Special Court started operations, because they knew that they would be dealing with people who may not necessarily understand English, the official language of the Court, they embarked on training interpreters. Today, they have a language unit within the Court Management section of the Registry.
Issue of interpreting is highly technical and professional. Technical because certain words are used that may not necessarily be in the local dialect. A qualified interpreter may be able to device a better way of interpreting complex court jargons. A professional interpreter that knows the ethics of interpretation would not laugh when for instance; a woman is explaining how she was raped. In fact, this brings the need to have trained women interpreters so that they will interpret during gender sensitive cases.
Interpreters should also be paid by the court and not by the litigants as it is happening in Bo. This is due to the fact that it is their right to have an interpreter free of charges and also to ensure the independence, neutrality and impartiality of those translating.