Publicação
Legal translation and the challenges of overcoming language barriers in court practice: evidence from Portuguese courts
| Resumo: | European legal standards on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings were significantly improved with the adoption of Directive 2010/64/EU, as evidenced by recent developments in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and in the domestic legislation and case law of EU Member States. Portugal is a good illustration of these developments, while also providing nuance to the overall picture. After initially dismissing the need to introduce any changes to its legal framework, Portugal finally amended its Code of Criminal Procedure in 2023 to comply with the Directive, and its courts have seen an exponential rise in litigation related to linguistic assistance in recent years. There is, however, considerable disparity in the case law of different appellate courts, and there are also still some unresolved issues, such as the time frame to plead the nullity arising from the failure to appoint an interpreter, the measures to ensure the quality of the interpretation and translation provided, and the training of judges, prosecutors, and judicial staff on the particularities of communicating with the assistance of an interpreter and of working in multilingual settings more broadly. Analysing the case law and the views expressed by judges, prosecutors, attorneys, and legal interpreters/translators during group and individual interviews conducted between 2020 and 2022 in the context of a research project on equality and cultural diversity in the practice of Portuguese courts, this article examines the legal developments prompted by Directive 2010/64/EU at the international/supranational European level and in the Portuguese legal system, and discusses the persistence of linguistic obstacles to equal access to justice and an effective right to a fair trial in Portugal. |
|---|---|
| Autores principais: | Jerónimo, Patrícia |
| Assunto: | Legal translation Directive 2010/64/EU Access to Justice Language barriers Portugal |
| Ano: | 2025 |
| País: | Portugal |
| Tipo de documento: | artigo |
| Tipo de acesso: | acesso aberto |
| Instituição associada: | Universidade do Minho |
| Idioma: | inglês |
| Origem: | RepositóriUM - Universidade do Minho |
| Resumo: | European legal standards on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings were significantly improved with the adoption of Directive 2010/64/EU, as evidenced by recent developments in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and in the domestic legislation and case law of EU Member States. Portugal is a good illustration of these developments, while also providing nuance to the overall picture. After initially dismissing the need to introduce any changes to its legal framework, Portugal finally amended its Code of Criminal Procedure in 2023 to comply with the Directive, and its courts have seen an exponential rise in litigation related to linguistic assistance in recent years. There is, however, considerable disparity in the case law of different appellate courts, and there are also still some unresolved issues, such as the time frame to plead the nullity arising from the failure to appoint an interpreter, the measures to ensure the quality of the interpretation and translation provided, and the training of judges, prosecutors, and judicial staff on the particularities of communicating with the assistance of an interpreter and of working in multilingual settings more broadly. Analysing the case law and the views expressed by judges, prosecutors, attorneys, and legal interpreters/translators during group and individual interviews conducted between 2020 and 2022 in the context of a research project on equality and cultural diversity in the practice of Portuguese courts, this article examines the legal developments prompted by Directive 2010/64/EU at the international/supranational European level and in the Portuguese legal system, and discusses the persistence of linguistic obstacles to equal access to justice and an effective right to a fair trial in Portugal. |
|---|