https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz7pdnnlr95o
13 November 2025
[…] The three men, who are asylum-seekers, had been set to enter pleas at Brighton Law Courts on Thursday but the hearing was adjourned as there was no Kurdish interpreter available for Mr Ahmadi. [...]
12 Nov 2025
A court interpreter who worked on Ireland's first and only female genital mutilation (FGM) case that was overturned on appeal over translation errors assisted in more than 240 other cases for the Irish Court Services.
The interpreter was involved in the 2019 trial of a couple, originally from French-speaking regions of Africa, convicted of and imprisoned for the FGM of their 21-month-old daughter. The defence argued throughout the trial that the child’s injury was accidental, caused by falling on a toy in the home.
The Court of Appeal later found "serious, and potentially far-reaching, inaccuracies" in the interpretation at that criminal trial, and set the convictions aside in 2021.
Despite this ruling, RTÉ is aware the interpreter continued to assist in criminal proceedings until December 2023.
While the appeal was brought on two grounds – medical evidence and interpretation – the Court of Appeal found the interpretation issues alone were serious enough to render the convictions unsafe.
This decision to set aside the conviction was the first time in Irish legal history that translation issues were grounds for a successful Circuit Court appeal.
The Courts Service confirmed to RTÉ that the interpreter had assisted in at least 246 court cases across the country between December 2016 and late December 2023.
Of these cases, 146 were for the District Court, 62 for the Circuit Court, 26 for the High Court, predominantly in the Central Criminal Court, and 12 cases were unattributable as the Court Services could not "identify a relevant jurisdiction from the information available".
RTÉ is further aware at least 40 of these cases were held after the successful appeal judgment across 19 locations nationwide.
However, according to the Courts Service, they are not aware of further appeals made as a result of interpretation by this individual.
These revelations, among others, came to light in a new joint investigation from RTÉ Documentary on One and RTÉ Investigates titled First Conviction, a six-part podcast series now available on all streaming services, and a television documentary, which airs tonight on RTÉ One at 9.35pm.
First Conviction marks the first time Sayeed and his wife Halawa, whose names have been changed to protect the anonymity of their children, have spoken publicly about what happened to their family.
For the purposes of both the podcast and the television documentary, their injured daughter is referred to as Ayeesha.
Lost in translation
Solicitor James MacGuill represented Sayeed in the appeal, while Halawa was represented by Hanahoe Solicitors.
In the courtroom, Sayeed, who was using French and Halawa, her native language, each had an interpreter to translate everything that was being said in English.
To identify the interpretation errors in the appeal, Mr MacGuill obtained a recording of Sayeed’s original testimony in French and sought the assistance of Dr Mary Phelan, Chair of the Association of Translators and Interpreters Ireland.
Dr Phelan, who also works at Dublin City University, is one of the preeminent experts in the country on translation, particularly in legal settings like courtrooms and garda stations.
Dr Phelan and her colleagues analysed 100 minutes of the interpreted testimony from Sayeed.
She compiled a report with the help of the founder of the European Legal Interpreters and Translators Association, Liese Katschinka, and Dr Christiane Driesen, who is a native French speaker and a legal interpreter.
The recordings were transcribed and set out side-by-side in a table to show where the interpretation diverged from the original testimony.
The report came to almost 150 pages long.
Dr Phelan said the interpreter made numerous basic errors during the trial.
"There were so many opportunities lost where the defendant could have had an opportunity to tell his side of the story, and he wasn't able to do that. The family was totally failed, really, by the poor interpreting in this trial," Dr Phelan said.
Dr Phelan’s report found that almost all of Sayeed’s evidence was affected by interpretation issues. She said they encountered a lot of problems with medical and legal language.
The interpreter, she added, did not do the basic homework throughout the trial to find out things like how to say FGM in French.
"I think a lot of interpreters, I would hope, that they would sit down and check things out at the end of day one or during a lunch break and make sure that they have the terms correct. But that didn't happen in this case, and I do find that very worrying," Dr Phelan said.
She said the interpreter also appeared to confuse basic terms, including words for body parts such as feet and legs.
One example concerned a toy the couple said their daughter may have fallen on, which resembles a small car dashboard. During the original trial, the defence argued that the child’s injury may have been caused by falling onto a toy in the home, rather than by an act of FGM.
"You can't get more basic than that. There's a lot of confusion about the toy, the activity centre that caused the injury, where there's confusion about what exactly the setup was, how did it happen."
This caused confusion within the courtroom, she explained.
"Nobody really knows what happened. The defendant can't give his side of the story properly or in a way that everybody in the court in the courtroom, including the jury, can actually understand."
The report compiled by Dr Phelan following her analysis led to the Court of Appeal deciding the conviction was unsafe in 2021.
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2025-10-24.85014.h
Department for Work and Pensions written question – answered at on 12 November 2025.
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 17 October 2025 to Question 83176 on Universal Credit, how many and what proportion of claims were made by people with the support of a paid interpreter; and what was the the total cost of (a) translation and (b) interpretation for supporting claimants in each of the last ten years.
The Department does not retain data on how many and what proportion of Universal Credit claims were made by people requiring the support of paid interpretation services. The breakdown of costs for translation and interpretation across all benefits including Universal Credit, from 2019/2020 to present is shown below. This data is not available prior to 2019.
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2025-11-03.87520.h
Ministry of Justice written question – answered at on 11 November 2025.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many (a) translators and (b) interpreters have worked in the prison estate since 2018; and what the total cost to the public purse was for their services.
HMPPS uses translation services provided under contract. These services provide translation by phone and do not require translators to physically come onto the prison estate. There may be specific occasions where in person translators are required but we do not hold a central record for these and to collect the information would incur disproportionate cost.
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2025-10-16.82833.h
Department for Work and Pensions written question – answered at on 4 November 2025.
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what estimate his Department has made of the number of benefits claimants who require translation support during appointments; and at what cost to the public purse.
The Department does not hold data on the number of individual claimants who require interpreter support.
