Unregulated interpretation puts lives at risk
Unregulated interpretation puts lives at risk - The Labour Party
- Patients and defendants deserve safe interpretation
Labour Conor Sheehan TD has called on the Government to urgently establish a regulatory and national standards framework for professional interpretation in judicial and medical settings, following his contribution in the Dáil yesterday. Deputy Sheehan said the absence of regulation leaves defendants and patients exposed to serious injustice and safety risks, breaches the State’s human rights obligations, and must be addressed immediately through a statutory register, accredited training and clear professional standards.
Deputy Sheehan said:
“Spoken language interpretation in legal and judicial settings in Ireland is completely unregulated. There is no obligation on an interpreter to be registered with a statutory body, no national register of interpreters, and no statutory framework governing who can interpret in our courts, hospitals or other public services. This is not a technical oversight. It is a fundamental failure of the State that directly undermines access to justice, equality before the law, and patient safety.
“This failure directly contravenes the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission Act 2014, which places a clear legal obligation on public bodies to promote equality, prevent discrimination and protect human rights in how services are delivered. When a person cannot understand proceedings in court or a medical consultation because interpretation is inaccurate, incomplete or misleading, their rights are not being upheld. They are being denied them.
“The consequences of this gap are not theoretical. They were laid bare in the Court of Appeal judgment in Director of Public Prosecutions v H.M and B.O, where the convictions of a married couple were quashed due to serious inaccuracies and distortions in interpretation. The Court found mistranslation of key legal and medical terms, omission of critical information, confusion of pronouns and distortion of questions and answers. These failures directly affected the jury’s ability to assess credibility and reliability. That should alarm everyone who believes in a fair justice system.
“The Government cannot ignore the clear lesson from that case. Interpretation is a highly skilled profession. The ability to speak two languages is not enough. Legal and medical interpreters must have a high level of proficiency in English and another language, mastery of specialised terminology, familiarity with regional vocabulary and idioms, and the ability to preserve the register used by a speaker. They must also understand and apply strict ethical principles. This requires significant training, assessment and ongoing professional oversight.
“Yet in Ireland there is no accredited training for legal interpreters, no testing to establish competence, no national standards framework and no professional code of ethics. In practice, anyone who can speak two languages can be placed in a courtroom or a clinical setting without any assurance that they meet the standards required. In medical settings in particular, the reliance on untrained staff or family members creates serious clinical and patient safety risks and places unacceptable pressure on families at moments of vulnerability.
“This issue has been raised for decades. As far back as 2008, a report published by then Minister of State Conor Lenihan identified the lack of regulation in Ireland’s translation and interpreting sectors and made clear recommendations. Nearly twenty years on, those recommendations remain unimplemented, with the State continuing to rely on private outsourcing instead of a robust, state regulated accreditation system.
“We need to move away from the dangerous assumption that any bilingual person can act as a competent interpreter. Other jurisdictions have shown that a regulatory body, a statutory register, accredited training and enforceable professional standards are achievable and effective. The Government must act now to put a proper framework in place, to protect defendants, patients and public confidence in our justice and healthcare systems, and to finally meet its human rights obligations.”