Code of Ethics for Arkansas Interpreters

ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NUMBER 11
ARKANSAS CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR
INTERPRETERS IN THE JUDICIARY
PREAMBLE
Many persons who come before the courts are partially or completely excluded from full
participation in the proceedings due to limited English proficiency or a speech or hearing
impairment. It is essential that the resulting communication barrier be removed, as far as
possible, so that these persons are placed in the same position as similarly situated persons for
whom there is no such barrier.¹ As officers of the court, interpreters help assure that such
persons may enjoy equal access to justice and that court proceedings and court support services
function efficiently and effectively. Interpreters are highly skilled professionals who fulfill an
essential role in the administration of justice.
APPLICABILITY
This code shall guide and be binding upon all persons, agencies and organizations who
administer, supervise use, or deliver interpreting services to the judiciary.
Commentary:
The black letter principles of this model code are principles of general application that
are unlikely to conflict with specific requirements of rule or law in the states, in the opinion of
the code’s drafters. Therefore, the use of the term “shall” is reserved to the black letter
principles. Statements in the commentary use the term “should” to describe behavior that
illustrates or elaborates the principles. The commentaries are intended to convey what the
drafters of this model code believe are probable and expected behaviors. Wherever a court
policy or routine practice appears to conflict with the commentary in this code, it is
recommended that the reasons for the policy as it applies to court interpreters be examined.
CANON 1: ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS
Interpreters shall render a complete and accurate interpretation or sight
translation, without altering, omitting, or adding anything to what is stated or written, and
without explanation.
______________________________________________________________________________
1. Non-English speaker should be able to understand just as much as an English speaker with the
same level of education and intelligence.
Commentary:
2
The interpreter has a two fold duty: 1) to ensure that the proceedings in English reflect
precisely what was said by a non-English speaking person, and 2) to place the non-English
speaking person on an equal footing with those who understand English. This creates an
obligation to conserve every element of information contained in a source language
communication when it is rendered in the target language.
Therefore, interpreters are obligated to apply their best skills and judgement to preserve
faithfully the meaning of what is said in court, including the style or register of speech.
Verbatim, “word for word,” or literal oral interpretations are not appropriate when they distort
the meaning of the source language, but every spoken statement, even if it appears nonresponsive,
obscene, rambling, or incoherent should be interpreted. This includes apparent
misstatements.
Interpreters should never interject their own words, phrases, or expressions. If the need
arises to explain an interpreting problem (e.g., a term or phrase with no direct equivalent in the
target language or a misunderstanding that only the interpreter can clarify), the interpreter should
aks the court’s permission to provide an explanation. Interpreters should convey the emotional
emphasis of the speaker without reenacting or mimicking the speaker’s emotions, or dramatic
gestures.
Sign language interpreters, however, must employ all of the visual cues that the language
they are interpreting for requires -including facial expressions, body language, and hand
gestures. Sign language interpreters, therefore, should ensure that court participants do not
confuse these essential elements of the interpreted language with inappropriate interpreter
conduct.
The obligation to preserve accuracy includes the interpreter’s duty to correct any error of
interpretation discovered by the interpreter during the proceeding. Interpreters should
demonstrate their professionalism by objectively analyzing any challenge to their performance.
CANON 2: REPRESENTATION OF QUALIFICATIONS
Interpreters shall accurately and completely represent their certifications, training
and pertinent experience.
Commentary:
Acceptance of a case by an interpreter conveys linguistic competency in legal settings.
Withdrawing or being asked to withdraw from a case after it begins causes a disruption of court
proceedings and is wasteful of scarce public resources. It is therefore essential that interpreters
present a complete and truthful account of their training, certification and experience prior to
3
appointment so the officers of the court can fairly evaluate their qualifications for delivering
interpreting services.
CANON 3: IMPARTIALITY AND AVOIDANCE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Interpreters shall be impartial and unbiased and shall refrain from conduct that
may give an appearance of bias. Interpreters shall disclose any real or perceived conflict of
interest.
Commentary:
The interpreter serves as an officer of the court and the interpreter’s duty in a court
proceeding is to serve the court and the public to which the court is a servant. This is true
regardless of whether the interpreter is publicly retained at government expense or retained
privately at the expense of one of the parties.
The interpreter should avoid any conduct or behavior that presents the appearance of
favoritism toward any of the parties. Interpreters should maintain professional relationships with
their clients, and should not take an active part in any of the proceedings. The interpreter should
discourage a non-English speaking party’s personal dependence.
During the course of the proceedings, interpreters should not converse with parties,
witnesses, jurors, attorneys, or with friends or relatives of any party, except in the discharge of
their official functions. It is especially important that interpreters, who are often familiar with
attorneys or other members of the courtroom work group, including law enforcement officials,
refrain from casual and personal conversations with anyone in court that may convey an
appearance of a special relationship or partiality to any of the court participants.
The interpreter should strive for professional detachment. Verbal and non-verbal
displays of personal attitudes, prejudices, emotions, or opinions should be avoided at all times.
Should an interpreter become aware that a proceeding participant views the interpreter as
having a bias or being biased, the interpreter should disclose that knowledge to the appropriate
judicial authority and counsel.
Any condition that interferes with the objectivity of an interpreter constitutes a conflict of
interest. Before providing services in a matter, court interpreters must disclose to all parties and
presiding officials any prior involvement, whether personal or professional, that could be
reasonably construed as a conflict of interest. This disclosure should not include privileged or
confidential information.
The following are circumstances that are presumed to create actual or apparent conflicts
4
of interest for interpreters where interpreters should not serve:
1. The interpreter is a friend, associate, or relative of a party or counsel for a party involved
in the proceeding;
2. The interpreter has served in an investigative capacity for any party involved in the case;
3. The interpreter has previously been retained by a law enforcement agency to assist in the
preparation of the criminal case at issue;
4. The interpreter or the interpreter’s spouse or child has a financial interest in the subject
matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that would be
affected by the outcome of the case;
5. The interpreter has been involved in the choice of counsel or law firm for that case.
Interpreters should not serve in any matter in which payment for their services is
contingent upon the outcome of the case.
An interpreter who is also an attorney should not serve in both capacities in the same
matter.
CANON 4: PROFESSIONAL DEMEANOR
Interpreters shall conduct themselves in a matter consistent with the dignity of the
court and shall be as unobtrusive as possible.
Commentary:
Interpreters should know and observe the established protocol, rules, and procedures for
delivering interpreting services. When speaking in English, interpreters should speak at a rate
and volume that enable them to be heard and understood throughout the courtroom, but the
interpreters’s presence should otherwise be as unobtrusive as possible. Interpreters should work
without drawing undue or inappropriate attention to themselves. Interpreters should dress in a
manner that is consistent with the dignity of the proceedings of the court.
Interpreters should avoid obstructing the view of any of the individuals involved in the
proceedings. However, interpreters who use sign language or other visual modes of
communication must be positioned so that hand gestures, facial expressions, and whole body
movement are visible to the person for whom they are interpreting.
Interpreters are encouraged to avoid personal or professional conduct that could discredit
the court.
5
CANON 5: CONFIDENTIALITY
Interpreters shall protect the confidentiality of all privileged and other confidential
information.
Commentary:
The interpreter must protect and uphold the confidentiality of all privileged information
obtained during the course of this or her duties. It is especially important that the interpreter
understand and uphold the attorney-client privilege, which requires confidentiality with respect
to any communication between attorney and client. This rule also applies to other types of
privileged communication.
Interpreters must also refrain from repeating or disclosing information obtained by them
in the course of their employment that may be relevant to the legal proceeding.
In the event that an interpreter becomes aware of information that suggests imminent
harm to someone or relates to a crime being committed during the course of the proceedings, the
interpreter should immediately disclose the information to an appropriate authority within the
judiciary who is not involved in the proceeding and seek advice in regard to the potential conflict
in professional responsibility.
CANON 6: RESTRICTION OF PUBLIC COMMENT
Interpreters shall not publicly discuss, report, or offer an opinion concerning a
matter in which they are or have been engaged, even when that information is not
privileged or required by law to be confidential.
CANON 7: SCOPE OF PRACTICE
Interpreters shall limit themselves to interpreting or translating, and shall not give
legal advice, express personal opinions to individuals for whom they are interpreting, or
engage in any other activities which may be construed to constitute a service other than
interpreting or translating while serving as an interpreter.
Commentary:
Since interpreters are responsible only for enabling others to communicate, they should
limit themselves to the activity of interpreting or translating only. Interpreters should refrain
from initiating communications while interpreting unless it is necessary for assuring an accurate
and faithful interpretation.
Interpreters may be required to initiate communications during a proceeding when they
6
find it necessary to seek assistance in performing their duties. Examples of such circumstances
include seeking direction when unable to understand or express a word or thought, requesting
speakers to moderate their rate of communication or repeat or rephrase something, correcting
their own interpreting errors, or notifying the court of reservations about their ability to satisfy
an assignment competently. In such instances they should make it clear that they are speaking
for themselves.
An interpreter may convey legal advice from an attorney to a person only while that
attorney is giving it. An interpret should not explain the purpose of forms, services, or otherwise
act as counselors or advisors unless they are interpreting for someone who is acting in that
official capacity. The interpreter may translate language on a form for a person who is filling out
the form, but may not explain the form or its purpose for such a person.
The interpreter should not personally serve to perform official acts that are the official
responsibility of other court officials including, but not limited to, court clerks, pretrial release
investigators or interviewers, or probation counselors.
CANON 8: ASSESSING AND REPORTING IMPEDIMENTS TO PERFORMANCE
Interpreters shall assess at all times their ability to deliver their services. When
interpreters have any reservation about their ability to satisfy an assignment competently,
they shall immediately convey that reservation to the appropriate judicial authority.
Commentary:
If the communication mode or language of the non-English-speaking person cannot be
readily interpreted, the interpreter should notify the appropriate judicial authority.
Interpreters should notify the appropriate judicial authority of any environmental or
physical limitation that impedes or hinders their ability to deliver interpreting services
adequately (e.g., the court room is not quiet enough for the interpret to hear or be heard by the
non-English speaker, more than one person at a time is speaking, or principals or witnesses of
the court are speaking at a rate of speed that is too rapid for the interpreter to adequately
interpret). Sign language interpreters must ensure that they can both see and convey the full
range of visual language elements that are necessary for communication, including facial
expressions and body movement, as well as hand gestures.
Interpreters should notify the presiding officer of the need to take periodic breaks to
maintain mental and physical alertness and prevent interpreter fatigue. Interpreters should
recommend and encourage the use of team interpreting whenever necessary.
Interpreters are encouraged to make inquiries as to the nature of a case whenever possible
before accepting an assignment. This enables interpreters to match more closely their
7
professional qualifications, skills, and experience to potential assignments and more accurately
assess their ability to satisfy those assignments competently.
Even competent and experienced interpreters may encounter cases where routine
proceedings suddenly involve technical or specialized terminology unfamiliar to the interpreter
(e.g., the unscheduled testimony of an expert witness). When such instances occur, interpreters
should request a brief recess to familiarize themselves with the subject matter. If familiarity with
the terminology requires extensive time or more intensive research, interpreters should inform
the presiding officer.
Interpreters should refrain from accepting a case if they feel the language and subject
matter of that case is likely to exceed their skills or capacities. Interpreters should feel no
compunction about notifying the presiding officer if they feel unable to perform competently,
due to lack of familiarity with terminology, preparation, or difficulty in understanding a witness
or defendant.
Interpreters should notify the presiding officer of any personal bias they may have
involving any aspect of the proceedings. For example, an interpreter who has been the victim of
assault may wish to be excused from interpreting in cases involving similar offenses.
CANON 9: DUTY TO REPORT ETHICAL VIOLATIONS
Interpreters shall report to the proper judicial authority any effort to impede their
compliace with any law, any provision of this code, or any other official policy governing
court interpreting and legal translating.
Commentary:
Because the users of interpreting services frequently misunderstand the proper role of the
interpreter, they may ask or expect the interpreter to perform duties or engage in activities that
run counter to the provisions of this code or other laws, regulations, or policies governing court
interpreters. It is incumbent upon the interpreter to inform such persons of his or her
professional obligations. If, having been apprised of these obligations, the person persists in
demanding that the interpreter violate them, the interpreter should turn to a supervisory
interpreter, a judge, or another official with jurisdiction over interpreter matters to resolve the
situation.
CANON 10: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Interpreters shall continually improve their skills and knowledge and advance the
profession through activities such as professional training and education, and interaction
with colleagues and specialists in related fields.
Commentary:
8
Interpreters must continually strive to increase their knowledge of the languages they
work in professionally, including past and current trends in technical, vernacular, and regional
terminology as well as their application within the court proceedings.
Interpreters should keep informed of all statutes, rules of courts and policies of the
judiciary that relate to the performance of their professional duties.
An interpreter should seek to elevate the standards of the profession through participation
in workshops, professional meetings, interaction with colleagues, and reading current literature
in the field.