Judicial reliance on the executive: tensions, discrepancies and recommendations for court interpreter service delivery models across Australian jurisdictions

Abstract

ABSTRACT In the past decade, there has been noticeable improvement in judicial attention and attitudes towards court interpreters, reflected in the implementation of various court interpreter protocols and the Recommended National Standards for Interpreters in Courts and Tribunals. However, this article identifies a number of discrepancies and gaps that still exist in the court interpreting framework in Australia. There are discrepancies across jurisdictions in the types of matters for which the court takes responsibility for engaging and paying for interpreters, and significantly different service delivery models for the funding, recruitment, training and coordination of interpreters. This study found a correlation between jurisdictions with centralised interpreting agencies and streamlined funding with courts who are more generous in their provision of interpreters and willingness to engage in innovative approaches such as the Northern Territory duty interpreter system. The article identifies service delivery frameworks which are more likely to enhance consistency and competence in court interpreters, concluding that centralised and government-funded agencies are more appropriate than small private for-profit agencies. The issues identified in relation to service delivery models illustrate judicial reliance on the executive branch of government to ensure a fair trial through the provision of interpreters. There are, however, immediate steps available to the judiciary such as a collection of data and implementation of small-scale duty interpreting, which are likely to precipitate more appropriate executive government policy responses to legal interpreting.