Chicken Talking to a Duck: Arguing Reason and Might—Where is the Court Interpreter Headed?

To sustain economic competitiveness, Taiwan began importing a large number of international workers starting in 1989 to engage in labor across various fields, including long-hour, low-wage jobs in manufacturing, construction, domestic help, and caregiving. According to statistics from the Bureau of Employment and Vocational Training of the Council of Labor Affairs of the Executive Yuan, as of the end of February 2006, the number of international workers residing in Taiwan reached 331,741 (see Table 1), hitting a historical high. In addition, the number of people from China applying for residency in Taiwan surged drastically from 8,468 in the previous year to 53,374 in 2004 following the implementation of the new "Regulations Governing Permission for People of the Mainland Area to Apply for Family-Visiting Residency, Long-Term Residency, or Permanent Residency in the Taiwan Area." Taiwan's international profile has become even more diverse following its opening up upon joining the World Trade Organization.

Diversity without integration is a major cause of conflict among ethnic groups. So-called "Mainland brides," "Vietnamese brides," and other foreign spouses have become vulnerable groups of concern for human rights organizations. One of the reasons is that the situations of migrant workers, immigrants, and international marriages have become a social phenomenon, with spouses from China and Vietnam being the most numerous. According to statistics from the National Police Agency of the Ministry of the Interior at the end of 2004, Vietnamese spouses reached 55,804; while statistics from the National Immigration Agency of the Ministry of the Interior showed that the cumulative number of Chinese spouses applying for residency or extended residency from January 1992 to February 2006 was as high as 225,207! With international workers and foreign spouses residing in Taiwan for long periods, the differences in language, culture, and living habits are too vast, and judicial cases and human rights controversies triggered by conflicts are also increasing day by day.

Language: A Spell Binding the Judiciary?

The relevant authorities must attach early importance to the new impacts brought about at various levels by the large influx of international migrant workers and marriage immigrants entering from China and Southeast Asia once again since 1945. Regrettably, our country's foreign language education policy has limited its vision solely to the international language of "English," while adopting an attitude toward the Southeast Asian language families—with which our country has close relations and geographical proximity—so cold that it can almost be said to reach the degree of "ignoring their existence." Of course, this is to say nothing of whether the general public has the ability to distinguish between the regional dialects used in Vietnam, or the differences among the Lao, Indonesian, and Philippine Tagalog languages.

Article 7 of the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights expounds upon the essence of human rights: "All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law." Article 10 also points out: "Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him." In our country's Constitution, the Code of Criminal Procedure, and various other legal texts, the ideology of "founding the nation upon human rights" is never forgotten in proclamations. Article 98 of the Court Organization Act explicitly stipulates: "If a party to litigation, a witness, an appender, or any other related person does not understand the national language, an interpreter shall translate." However, the so-called "national language" has long been merely "the language of the hegemon," completely intolerant of the existence of any other languages. The staffing establishment and identity role of "court interpreter personnel" in the courtroom are also little different from those of court clerks and bailiffs; moreover, they are merely decorative props used to set off human rights dignity.

Court Interpreters: The Epitome of Drawing Pay for Doing Nothing?

The Taiwan Judicial Reform Foundation's 6th Court Observation Report published in 2000 included the following observation record:

"During the process of questioning witnesses, because one of the witnesses was an Indonesian migrant worker, the two sides did not share a common language, and it could not be ascertained whether the witness understood what the judge was asking. The witness signed and took an oath seemingly without knowing anything, which was somewhat perfunctory."

Meanwhile, in the 7th Court Observation Report of 2001, the problem of court interpreters' insufficient language proficiency still persisted:

"Aside from the obvious contrast of vulnerability presented in court by defendants without defense counsel, it can also be found from the records of court observations that general observers questioned the existence of 'interpreters.' Because interpreters currently fail to perform the function of 'communication and translation' in court whatsoever, judging from actual cases, the vast majority of interpreters not only lack proficiency in the international language of English, but even speak Taiwanese and Hakka less fluently than judges, to the extent that they require judges to remind and correct them on the sidelines. This inevitably makes one wonder: when encountering parties who genuinely require translation, how exactly are current court interpreters supposed to provide assistance? How can the judiciary safeguard those parties who require different languages (or even sign language)? Are court interpreters in the courts not rendered practically useless? And how can such parties be enabled to enjoy an equal trial?

"Furthermore, interpreters who are even more 'majestic' than judges are not in short supply, leaving parties below the bench confused as to why someone in the courtroom can be fiercer than the judge. This kind of phenomenon cannot help but make one doubt: what is the value of an interpreter's existence? If it is merely to press a tape recorder or hand over evidence, it would seem that bailiffs could serve the role, obviating the need to increase the personnel burden of judicial administration. Moreover, we must further question: what are the qualifications for an interpreter position? What are the examination and selection procedures? How are performance evaluations conducted? Is there a fair competitive method, or has it devolved into a convenient position for those in power to arrange personal connections? The Judicial Yuan should provide an explanation addressing the public's doubts regarding interpreters, make the appointment qualifications and examination selection procedures for interpreters open and transparent to eliminate malpractice, and further explain the necessity of interpreters' existence. Otherwise, next year the Legislative Yuan should cut the Judicial Yuan's budget allocated for interpreters and reallocate the judicial budget to expenditure items that can better support judicial trials."

The JRF once requested the Judicial Yuan to provide data such as the number of criminal cases involving foreigners in the most recent year, the number of cases utilizing interpreters, and the number of professional interpreters, but the Judicial Yuan stated that no relevant statistical data was available. Attorney Chang Shih-hsing believes that situations where the court ought to use an interpreter but fails to do so, or where unqualified interpreters are appointed thereby infringing upon human rights, are by no means rare.

Court Interpreter Tales of the Bizarre

While criticisms still rang in the ears, the JRF specially visited several social service organizations that had served as pro bono interpreters on multiple occasions to investigate the quality of court interpreters. The results revealed that our courts still treat court interpreters as "chicken ribs" [worthless yet hard to discard].

Father Nguyễn Văn Hùng of the Viet-Caritas Office stated that in a sexual assault case involving a Vietnamese bride, the court interpreter did not know Vietnamese, and the interpretation was actually performed by an employee of a manpower agency. Under conditions of a conflict of interest, the interpreter intentionally or unintentionally misled the victim into making testimony disadvantageous to herself. "The judge asked whether the perpetrator's sexual organs had any wounds, but the agency employee acting as the interpreter failed to convey this, instead telling the victim that the judge was asking whether the perpetrator wore a 'diaper.' The victim thought to herself that such a thing could not possibly be true, and thus replied 'no.' The judge ultimately ruled that the party lost the case," recalled Father Nguyễn Văn Hùng, who was observing the proceedings at the time. This case is still currently under appeal.

The Serve the People Association pointed out that among the cases it currently serves, approximately 20% can only be resolved through legal channels. Many cases involving international migrant workers or domestic helpers often encounter communication problems during the police investigation stage. For the convenience of taking transcripts and conducting investigations, the police often view social service organizations as trouble and only want to find manpower agencies to act as translators. However, manpower agencies, in order to protect their own rights and interests, often stand on the same side as employers and shield them, leaving international workers and domestic helpers to fall victim.

Hsiao Yu-pei, a volunteer worker at the Serve the People Association, also indicated that some cases involve foreign laborers or domestic helpers going to court due to disputes with employers or agencies. "Yet during investigations, the police actually asked the defendant to turn around and help translate for the foreign laborer or domestic helper; the result of the transcript can be imagined. In addition, among the cases we have served, not a single court (or investigative court) has ever proactively arranged an interpreter for foreign parties when court is convened, even though they already knew the parties were foreigners long beforehand." Hsiao Yu-pei emphasized: "Not even once."

Father Nguyễn Văn Hùng mentioned that on one occasion he acted on behalf of a case involving a victim who had long been sexually harassed by her employer. The victim suffered immense psychological pressure and attempted suicide but was fortunately rescued, and filed charges against her employer. The police only found a manpower agency to act as the interpreter for the transcript. Only upon the demands of the victim and Father Nguyễn Văn Hùng did they agree to let Father Nguyễn assist with translation. "Unexpectedly, while I briefly stepped away to use the restroom, the manpower agency actually told the police that the victim stated she had not been sexually harassed, and early the next morning after the victim's injuries stabilized, they took her away from the hospital and sent her to the Vietnamese representative office, demanding her repatriation."

Sister Wei Wei of the Serve the People Association also stated: "In fact, it is not just international workers; some ethnic groups, such as indigenous peoples, also have an ability to use the 'national language' inferior to that of the Han people, which is likewise a point that must be squarely faced." She once encountered an indigenous person who, due to not understanding the national language, signed a contract extremely detrimental to himself, resulting in a loss of rights. This also demonstrates another key point: in terms of the language translation tier of interpreters, beyond "language," "semantic meaning," particularly the correct translation of legal language, is extremely important.

The Judicial Yuan Finally Gives a Preliminary Response

Do court interpreter personnel continue to play the role of drawing pay for doing nothing in the courtroom? The Judicial Yuan finally gave a definitive reply to the JRF's questioning. According to the official document issued by the Judicial Yuan to the JRF on March 27, 2006, the specific improvement measures in the future are as follows:

1. Establish a database of various language translation talents; cases requiring interpreters of special languages are planned to be handled through outsourcing to human resources. Courts will budget to pay reasonable fees for personnel serving as interpreters in order to attract talent to join.
2. Interpreters will, in principle, not be replaced upon vacancy, and depending on the operational needs of each court, positions will be reallocated to other job vacancies. Furthermore, conditions to be met by incumbent interpreters of various grades will be prescribed.
3. For incumbent interpreter personnel, various courts will strengthen on-the-job training and, depending on differing conditions such as age and learning capacity, select and dispatch appropriate personnel for advanced studies in foreign languages and sign language. For those who still fail to meet standards within a reasonable time limit, the feasibility of transferring them to positions such as court clerks or court bailiffs will be studied.
4. Various interpreter talents required by the courts will be widely publicized through appropriate channels, encouraging willing individuals to apply to join the talent database.

Preparing to Become a New Immigrant Nation

Perhaps, on the path of rapidly moving toward a "new immigrant nation," Taiwan's steps are somewhat unsteady. In order to pursue continuous development, we must face the reality of a massive increase in immigrants and migrant workers, but this is precisely the prime opportunity for us to re-examine the court interpreter system. Can the reform measures of the Judicial Yuan bring forth a refreshing change? Let us wait and see.