21 Appointing Qualified Interpreters
Chapter 21: Appointing Qualified Interpreters
By: Jana J. Edmondson-Cooper, Esq., Member, Supreme Court of Georgia Commission on Interpreters
(Judge Melodie H. Clayton and Judge Dax E. Lopez, eds.)
21.1 Introduction
Georgia courts are required to provide qualified interpreters, without cost, to limited English proficient (LEP) and Deaf/Hard of Hearing (DHH) participants.[1] As of 2011, the right to an interpreter in Georgia applies in all cases, criminal and civil, as well as court-managed administrative forums and functions.[2] The expense of providing an interpreter in any legal proceeding is borne by the local court or appropriate governing body.[3] The Supreme Court of Georgia Commission on Interpreters ("COI" / "Georgia Commission on Interpreters"/ "the Commission") provides interpreter licensing, regulatory and education services for Georgia courts so they can ensure the rights of non-English speaking and DHH persons.[4] Commission staff is available to provide guidance to courts in order to help courts meet their language access obligations. Courts are encouraged to contact Commission staff regarding their language access questions, concerns and/or needs.[5]
21.2 Federal and State Authority
A. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d
B. Lau v. Nichols. 444 U.S. 563 (1974)
C. Executive Order 13166, 65 FR 50121 (August 2000)
D. U.S. Department of Justice Guidance to Federal Financial Assistance Recipients Regarding Title VI Prohibition Against National Origin Discrimination Affecting Limited English Proficient Persons, 67 F.R. 41,455 (June 2002) (DOJ Guidance)
E. Liese v. Indian River Cnty. Hosp. Dist., 701 F.3d 334, 336 (11th Cir. 2012)
F. Ramos v. Terry, 279 Ga. 889, 622 S.E.2d 339 (2005)
G. Ling v. State, 288 Ga. 299, 702 S.E.2d 881 (2010)
H. State v. Tunkara, 298 Ga. 488, 782 S.E.2d 278 (2016)
I. Supreme Court of Georgia Rule on Use of Interpreters for Non-English Speaking and Hearing Impaired Persons (Rule)
J. O.C.G.A. §§ 24-6-652 through 658; O.C.G.A. § 15-6-77(e)(4)
K. Uniform Superior Court Rule 7.3 (amended 07/13/2017)
L. Judicial Council of Georgia 2017 ADA Judicial Handbook
21.3 Determining if a Foreign Language or Sign Language Interpreter is Required
21.31 Request by Counsel/Pro Se Litigant
Protocol varies from judicial circuit to judicial circuit. Judges are encouraged to confirm what the protocol or practice is in their circuit. Examples include:
1. Verbal/Written request to Judge's Law Clerk /Administrative Assistant
2. Verbal/Written request to the District Court Administrator
3. Verbal/Written request to specified point-person within the judicial circuit
4. Verbal/Written request to the court Clerk's office
21.32 Sua Sponte
The decision maker may make a determination to inquire into the necessity for an interpreter based upon his or her observations.
21.33 Examination
1. Examination by the Judge
a. Upon request, or sua sponte, the decision maker (generally the judge presiding over the case) may voir dire the litigant or witness to determine his/her level of English comprehension. To make that determination, the decision maker should normally include questions on the following:
i. Identification (e.g., name, address, DOB, place of birth)
ii. Active Vocabulary
Questions should be phrased to avoid "yes" or "no" replies.
1. "How did you come to the proceeding today?"
2. "What kind of work do you do ?"
3. "Describe what you see in the room."
4. "What have you eaten today?"
iii. The civil or criminal proceeding
1. "What is the purpose of the proceeding?"
2. "What is your understanding of my role as the judge?"
3. "What is your understanding of the legal rights you have as a party or defendant in this case?"
4. "What is your understanding of your responsibilities as a witness in this case?"
Rule, Appendix A (II)(C).
21.34 Determination on the Record
An interpreter is needed and an interpreter shall be appointed when the decision maker determines that (1) the party cannot understand and speak English well enough to participate fully in the proceedings and to assist counsel; or (2) the witness cannot speak English so as to be understood directly by counsel, the decision maker, and/or the jury. After examination the decision maker should state his or her conclusion on the record, and the file in the case should be clearly marked and data entered electronically when appropriate by personnel to ensure that an interpreter will be present when needed in any subsequent proceeding. Rule, Appendix A (II)(D).
21.35 Pre-Appearance Interview
For good cause, the decision maker should authorize a pre-appearance interview between the interpreter and the party or witness, good cause exists if the interpreter needs clarification on any interpreting issues, including but not limited to: colloquialisms, culturalisms, dialects, idioms, linguistic capabilities and traits, regionalisms, register, slang, speech patterns, or technical terms. Rule, Appendix A (II)(E).
NOTE: In some instances, the decision-maker may skip the voir dire process and appoint the interpreter based solely on counsel's or the pro se litigant's written and/or verbal request. The Rule does not mandate the court to voir dire the LEP/DHH individual.
NOTE: The fact that an individual speaks or understands some English does not preclude the individual from the right to have an interpreter appointed by the court.
21.4 Appointment of Qualified Interpreters
If an interpreter is required, the courts should ensure that a qualified interpreter is appointed. Trial court judges are encouraged to consider the vital importance of appointing qualified interpreters, whether foreign language or sign language, to assist in legal proceedings. When an unqualified or no interpreter is appointed, the court risks substantive injustice and due process violations because of possible incompetent interpretation (including inaccuracies due to paraphrasing, summarization and omission) and breach of confidentiality. Unqualified interpreters often lack the required technical skills to competently interpret legal terms of art or comprehend nuanced usage of words whose definitions often vary from country to country. Moreover, unqualified interpreters are often unaware of the ethical obligations legal interpreters in Georgia are required to abide by when providing interpretation services. As a result, unqualified interpreters may advise or coach LEP or DHH participants, unbeknownst to the court, on what to say or not say when responding to questions asked by attorneys and judges.
21.41 Appointment of Sign Language Interpreters
A. "Court qualified" or "Qualified" - To be recognized as a court qualified interpreter or qualified interpreter in Georgia, an interpreter must hold a current certification from the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID).[6] These designations are defined by the Official Code of Georgia. See, O.C.G.A. §§ 24-6-652 through 658. Rule, Appendix A (I). See also, Supreme Court of Georgia Commission on Interpreters Bench Card for Working with Deaf and Hard of Hearing Persons and Sign Language Interpreters in the Courtroom
B. For legal proceedings, courts should first try to use certified sign language interpreters who hold this credential: SC:L (Specialist Certificate: Legal) Preferred or other recommended credentials based on demonstrated specialized knowledge of legal system, language, and court settings.[7]
C. If an SC:L interpreter cannot be located, interpreters with the following RID certifications may also be used. However, it is recommended that they have additional specialized training in legal interpreting:[8]
1. NIC (National Interpreter Certification), Master
2. NAD V (National Association of the Deaf: Certification - Master)
3. CI and CT (Certificate of Interpretation and Certificate of Transliteration)
4. CDI (Certified Deaf Interpreter)
5. CSC (Comprehensive Skills Certificate)
21.42 Appointment of Foreign Language Interpreters
A. Licensing Designations by the Commission[9]
1. Certified - individuals competent in court interpretation as demonstrated by successful completion of an oral and written...
To continue reading
Request your trial