UK judiciary express concern about court
interpreting
The Judiciary has begun to
speak out against the private contract for court interpreting awarded by the
Ministry of Justice to Applied Language Solutions, owned by Capita, which came
into operation on 30th January 2012.
In the meantime the
additional costs of trial adjournments due to shortages of interpreters in the
first three months of the contract have prompted Margaret Hodge MP, Chair of
the Public Accounts Committee, to forward her concerns to the National Audit
Office, asking them to look into the Framework Agreement (FWA) from a value for
money perspective. The Justice Select Committee has also stated it is likely to
review the matter.
David Radford, Resident
Judge at Snaresbrook Crown Court (writing in the May issue of the London
Advocate) says: “We have been badly affected by the change to one contractor”.
He goes onto say of the contract: “It was introduced without the full board
approval of Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals service, including the judicial
representatives. I believe the contract is now being monitored on a weekly
basis.”
Concerns from other judges
have been published elsewhere, including Yorkshire Evening Post. Judge
Christopher Batty at Leeds Crown Court on 4th May announced he would make a
formal complaint when he had to dismiss a Slovak interpreter, booked by ALS,
because she could not understand what was going on in the case of a sham
marriage gang.
Barrister Tariq Rehman from
Birmingham Chambers was acting for one of the five defendants and witnessed the
proceedings, which were saved from being abandoned when a volunteer
interpreter, who is boycotting the new system, stepped in from the public
gallery to help. He says:
“The bottom line, as far as I am concerned as a barrister, is that this is typical of the Minister of Justice not interested at all in the slightest as to whether the change of course is going to compromise the service and quality as long as they are going to save money. This was not an isolated incident; I have seen it elsewhere as well.”
“The bottom line, as far as I am concerned as a barrister, is that this is typical of the Minister of Justice not interested at all in the slightest as to whether the change of course is going to compromise the service and quality as long as they are going to save money. This was not an isolated incident; I have seen it elsewhere as well.”
A London Barrister, Kevin
Metzger from Grays Inn Square, says: “It’s all about fairness and the
principles of Common Law and natural justice – if you don’t understand what’s
being said about you or you can’t explain yourself, the principal of fairness
goes out the window. I really think that the authorities ought to look very
carefully at the cost cutting because it will end up bringing our system of
justice into disrepute.”
He added: “What is sad is
that we have prided ourselves on a system of justice that the whole world has
looked up to and we have now got ourselves into a situation where we could be
accused of merely paying lip service to it.”
No comments:
Post a Comment