a sociological approach of the professionalization process of court interpreting in greece zoi resta...
TRANSCRIPT
A sociological approach of the professionalization process of court interpreting in Greece
Zoi Resta - Anastasios IoannidisProfessionalization vs. Deprofessionalization: Building Standards for Legal Translators and InterpretersOpatija, Croatia20-21 March 2015
The sociological model of Joseph Tseng
Tseng studies the process of professionalization of conference interpreting and describes the attempt of an occupational group to struggle for professional status in four phases; from the starting point of Market Disorder until the last stage of Professional Autonomy.
Tseng, J. (1992). Interpreting as an Emerging Profession in Taiwan — A Sociological Model:
Master's Thesis, Fu Jen Catholic University, Taiwan
THE INTERPRETERS’ PROFESSIONALIZATION MODEL OF J. TSENG
Phase I: market disorientation Practitioners cannot keep outsiders from entering
practice. Clients and the public in general do not understand
the nature and the quality of the services; what matters more is price.
In case there are clients seeking for quality services, they do not know where to get qualified practitioners.
This vicious circle can be broken if trained practitioners urge training institutions all over the country to form common curricula for the specific occupation. After a certain period of time, the practitioners will be divided roughly into trained, inadequately trained and untrained practitioners.
Phase II: The training institutions of the country cooperate in
order to produce top-notch practitioners with common competences, who possess an esoteric body of language, in order to distinguish themselves from the untrained ones.
Training institutions, at the same time, continue to adapt their curricula to the developments of the profession and to the demand for quality services in the market.
This situation reinforces the consensus and commitment of the practitioners to the profession and leads to the establishment of a professional association, promoting -this way- practitioners a step further towards their professionalization.
Phase III: The association strives to rally social support to justify the professional claim;it has a code of ethics, regularly adaptable to the market shifts, in order for the association to keep its empowered position in the market, it “filters” the appropriate or inappropriate training schools, it creates links with the government in order to promote through legislation its position in the market, so that it can be generally accepted that “only members of the association can offer ascertained quality services”.
Phase III
This situation can help practitioners earn public trust and can reduce competition among them, since now quality -and not price- is the main criterion for undertaking a job
Phase IV: The association and the trained
practitioners have achieved to exercise market control.
At this stage the association can make use of its connections with the governing authorities in order to lobby for the adoption of a bill to legally grant autonomy to the profession and exclude outsiders from practice.
That way, the dominant role of the association is legally acknowledged and the professionals gain the desired professional autonomy in the country’s market.
In his model, Tseng highlights the major role of …
1. Training 2. Accreditation 3. Professional Organization 4. Code of ethics and role clarification 5. Status (public recognition, working
conditions, remuneration)
Our case study We will try to describe how the above mentioned
criteria are applied in Greece, according to the results of our research based on observation and on fieldwork.
Specifically, we based our research on Mira Kadric’ s model, who conducted in 2000 via a questionnaire-based survey with 133 local court judges in Vienna. So, we addressed a similar questionnaire to the judges of the Court of First Instance in Thessaloniki. At the moment, a total of 18 replies was received from the 60 questionnaires distributed, representing a response rate of 30%.
Kadric, M. (2009). Dolmetschen bei Gericht. Erwartungen, Anforderungen, Kompetenzen. Wien: WUV-Universitätsverlag
1. TrainingOnly trace elements of court interpreting
education in Greece: the Technological Institution of Epirus offers some
introductory lessons about Court Interpreting the NGO “Metadrasi” (UNCHR) offers since 2010 two-
weeks-seminars for participants who are willing to work as interpreters in asylum procedures.
At university level → study programs only for conference interpreting
There is not even one educational program specializing in court interpreting.
2. AccreditationThe current situation:The right to interpretation is enshrined in Art. 233
(1) of the Greek CCP.
For this purpose:Art. 233 (2): once a year a List of Interpreters is
drawn up by the local Council of Magistrates in which persons residing or working within the area of jurisdiction of the court can be included. Only in cases of emergency and if it is not possible to appoint an interpreter from the list, the court can appoint someone who is not included in it.
2. AccreditationThe Greek law does not impose any
requirements or qualification for court interpreters, nor does it provide for any mechanism for qualifying them as such.
As a result…
anyone can define themselves as interpreter and apply for their name, as well as their working language(s), to be included in the List, without needing to provide any proof of their qualifications.
2. Accreditation
However, the official List does not represent the only way for the appointment of an interpreter:
Only 22 % use always the official List, 62% acknowledge to appointing sometimes a
person who is not officially included in the List but he/she happens to be in the courtroom at the time needed.
0
20
40
60
80
Appointmentfrom the
official List
always
sometimes
often
never0
20
40
60
80
Appointment outof the List
always
sometimes
often
never
2. Accreditation This situation has often raised quality and thus human rights
issues, like for instance in case of a woman who was appointed as an interpreter by the criminal courts of Thessaloniki in trials involving Albanians witnesses or accused persons, although she was included in the Court’s List for the Bulgarian, Serbian and Yugoslavian language. The case came to light and she was found acquitted of all charges.
3. Professional OrganizationTseng strongly emphasizes in his model the great
significance of a professional organization for the development of an occupation. In Greece, however, there is no professional organization exclusively dedicated to the Greek-speaking interpreters, let alone court interpreters.
Only: the Panhellenic Association for Translators, and the Panhellenic Association of Professional Translators
Graduates of the Ionian Universitywhich both accept as their members only applicants who
have been practicing the profession of translator.
4. Code of ethics and role clarification
Ethical behavior, as well as roles and tasks of court interpreters in Greece→ too vague and not regulated.
In order to obtain a clearer view, we asked the Greek Judges, how they would define the role and the specific tasks of court interpreters.
4. Code of ethics and role clarification
More specifically, we asked them to determine the precise function of court interpreters by choosing between the following options:
Court Experts on intercultural communication Language mediators Language and culture mediators Auxiliary organs of the court Helpers of the foreign-language-speaking person.
4. Code of ethics and role clarification
The Greek judges believe that court interpreters are: language mediators (55,5%) auxiliary organs of the court (28%).
4. Code of ethics and role clarification
The Greek judges expect from court interpreters: to draw attention to misunderstandings (89 %) to explain the legal terms (72%) to explain the cultural background of the foreign-
language-speaking person (100 %).
4. Code of ethics and role clarification
But they do not consider part of court interpreters’ mission: to resolve uncertainties through independent inquiries
(66%) to summarise (55%) to omit (72%) to conduct independently routine procedures (89 %).
4. Code of ethics and role clarification Conclusion → the fact that the answer “language
mediator” is the most popular highlights the problematic and distorted perception of court interpreters’ role as merely a machine or conduit of words.
In addition, the judges appear to set contradictory standards for court interpreters: On the one hand, they are required to establish feasible communication links, by simplifying for instance complicate utterances, resolving misunderstandings or bridging cultural differences and, on the other hand, to be “invisible” (not to ask independently, not to summarise etc).
4. Code of ethics and role clarification
Codes of ethics can be the answer to the issue of court interpreter’s role(s).
The most common conduct standards are the ethical considerations of: accuracy impartiality confidentiality
However, in Greece, there is not a code of ethics for court interpreters.
4. Code of ethics and role clarification
So, we looked for court interpreters’ ethics in the Greek legal provisions
Article 236 CCP: “interpreters […] have to take an oath […] to translate everything being said during the hearing with precision and accuracy”
Directive 2010/64/EU: interpreters have to provide their services “under the observance of strict confidentiality […]”.
There is no further insight, no ethical framework for court interpreters in Greece.
5. Working ConditionsIn Greece, court interpreters : are not represented through a professional associate or
a trade union. their remuneration amounts 11,74 euro for each
interrogation procedure and 17,64 for each court case. are obliged to attend the court room at 9 a.m, without
knowing when and whether their services would be enlisted.
should the trial be postponed, they receive no remuneration
no additional charges for overtime work.
ConclusionIn Greece there is:no training institutionno accreditation procedureno professional Organization no code of ethicsno public recognition and acknowledged status
for court interpreters
Conclusion
According to the sociological model of Joseph Tseng, court interpreting in Greece is at Phase I: Market Disorder.
