Dear Colleague,
We have spoken to you at one time regarding the request to hold an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) and the following amendments to CIAO constitution to enable new members to be elected to the board.
We have already published a list containing 20 names as signatories to the request and we are adding an additional 15 names to it to present on the day of the meeting, Sunday Dec. 12th.
Would you please advise us of the following as soon as possible ?
1- Are you a CIAO member in good standing? Have you submitted your membership application and paid your membership fee of $35.00?
2- Would you confirm your consent to using your name as a signatory to the request of EGM and Constitution Amendments?
3- If you have sent in your cheque and membership application form to CIAO and have not received your receipt, would you please write a short declaration to the effect that you have mailed in your application and your cheqe and whether or not the cheque has been cashed?
Thank you,
CIAO Board Members,
Mohammad Mashari
Mani Veluppilai
Amin Shoukri
Candiah Nadarajah
Friday, December 10, 2010
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
CIAO EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL MEETING
CIAO EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL MEETING
TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION AND ELECT A NEW BOARD
All court interpreters of Ontario are hereby notified that an Extraordinary Meeting for the purpose of electing a new Board of CIAO will be held on:
Date: December, 12, 2010Time: 10:30 AM to 1:30 PM
Venue: Council Chamber, North York Civic Center
5100 Yonge Street, Toronto ON, M2N 5V7
Mel Lastman Square – close to North York Subway Station
Paid street parking and underground parking available
The attendance of all court interpreters is crucial at this time regardless of their current status or standing with CIAO. Their participation is requested in person or by proxy (given to a colleague who is attending) for electing a new board.
For the purpose of the Extraordinary Meeting, any court interpreter can become a member or renew his or her membership on the spot with immediate effect. A few members have been proposed as candidates for the new board. Other candidates may also be proposed from the floor. An elector will have multiple votes matching the number of seats in the new board. For instance, you will have 9 votes if there are 9 seats in the new board. You may use all your 9 votes in any way you desire. This will enable the voters to participate in the election of each board member. Subsequent to the election, the newly elected board will elect its office-bearers.
Your presence is important for the future of our new CIAO. Please make your vote count by attending and participating in the elections to ensure a fair and democratic representation of the interpreters.
Please see attached:
1- The Agenda for Meeting of December 12, 2010
2- A copy of CIAO Constitution
3- A list of constitutional clauses to be amended, requested by 20 members
4- Proxy Form (2 proxies)
5- Reminder of Meeting (EGM) of Dec. 12, 2010
CIAO Board Members:
Mohammad Mashari
Candiah Nadarajah
Amin Shoukri
Mani Velupillai
TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION AND ELECT A NEW BOARD
All court interpreters of Ontario are hereby notified that an Extraordinary Meeting for the purpose of electing a new Board of CIAO will be held on:
Date: December, 12, 2010Time: 10:30 AM to 1:30 PM
Venue: Council Chamber, North York Civic Center
5100 Yonge Street, Toronto ON, M2N 5V7
Mel Lastman Square – close to North York Subway Station
Paid street parking and underground parking available
The attendance of all court interpreters is crucial at this time regardless of their current status or standing with CIAO. Their participation is requested in person or by proxy (given to a colleague who is attending) for electing a new board.
For the purpose of the Extraordinary Meeting, any court interpreter can become a member or renew his or her membership on the spot with immediate effect. A few members have been proposed as candidates for the new board. Other candidates may also be proposed from the floor. An elector will have multiple votes matching the number of seats in the new board. For instance, you will have 9 votes if there are 9 seats in the new board. You may use all your 9 votes in any way you desire. This will enable the voters to participate in the election of each board member. Subsequent to the election, the newly elected board will elect its office-bearers.
Your presence is important for the future of our new CIAO. Please make your vote count by attending and participating in the elections to ensure a fair and democratic representation of the interpreters.
Please see attached:
1- The Agenda for Meeting of December 12, 2010
2- A copy of CIAO Constitution
3- A list of constitutional clauses to be amended, requested by 20 members
4- Proxy Form (2 proxies)
5- Reminder of Meeting (EGM) of Dec. 12, 2010
CIAO Board Members:
Mohammad Mashari
Candiah Nadarajah
Amin Shoukri
Mani Velupillai
Monday, November 29, 2010
CIAO EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL MEETING
CIAO EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL MEETING
TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION AND ELECT A NEW BOARD
All court interpreters of Ontario are hereby notified that an Extraordinary Meeting for the purpose of electing a new Board of CIAO will be held on:
Date: December, 12, 2010Time: 10:30 AM to 1:30 PM
Venue: Council Chamber, North York Civic Center
5100 Yonge Street, Toronto ON, M2N 5V7
Mel Lastman Square – close to North York Subway Station
Paid street parking and underground parking available
The attendance of all court interpreters is crucial at this time regardless of their current status or standing with CIAO. Their participation is requested in person or by proxy (given to a colleague who is attending) for electing a new board.
For the purpose of the Extraordinary Meeting, any court interpreter can become a member or renew his or her membership on the spot with immediate effect. A few members have been proposed as candidates for the new board. Other candidates may also be proposed from the floor. An elector will have multiple votes matching the number of seats in the new board. For instance, you will have 9 votes if there are 9 seats in the new board. You may use all your 9 votes in any way you desire. This will enable the voters to participate in the election of each board member. Subsequent to the election, the newly elected board will elect its office-bearers.
Your presence is important for the future of our new CIAO. Please make your vote count by attending and participating in the elections to ensure a fair and democratic representation of the interpreters.
Please see attached:
1- The Agenda for Meeting of December 12, 2010
2- A copy of CIAO Constitution
3- A list of constitutional clauses to be amended, requested by 21 members
4- A Proxy Form
CIAO Board Members:
Mohammad Mashari
Candiah Nadarajah
Amin Shoukri
Mani Velupillai
TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION AND ELECT A NEW BOARD
All court interpreters of Ontario are hereby notified that an Extraordinary Meeting for the purpose of electing a new Board of CIAO will be held on:
Date: December, 12, 2010Time: 10:30 AM to 1:30 PM
Venue: Council Chamber, North York Civic Center
5100 Yonge Street, Toronto ON, M2N 5V7
Mel Lastman Square – close to North York Subway Station
Paid street parking and underground parking available
The attendance of all court interpreters is crucial at this time regardless of their current status or standing with CIAO. Their participation is requested in person or by proxy (given to a colleague who is attending) for electing a new board.
For the purpose of the Extraordinary Meeting, any court interpreter can become a member or renew his or her membership on the spot with immediate effect. A few members have been proposed as candidates for the new board. Other candidates may also be proposed from the floor. An elector will have multiple votes matching the number of seats in the new board. For instance, you will have 9 votes if there are 9 seats in the new board. You may use all your 9 votes in any way you desire. This will enable the voters to participate in the election of each board member. Subsequent to the election, the newly elected board will elect its office-bearers.
Your presence is important for the future of our new CIAO. Please make your vote count by attending and participating in the elections to ensure a fair and democratic representation of the interpreters.
Please see attached:
1- The Agenda for Meeting of December 12, 2010
2- A copy of CIAO Constitution
3- A list of constitutional clauses to be amended, requested by 21 members
4- A Proxy Form
CIAO Board Members:
Mohammad Mashari
Candiah Nadarajah
Amin Shoukri
Mani Velupillai
EGM AGENDA
EGM AGENDA
Extraordinary General Meeting of December 12, 2010
Court Interpreters Association of Ontario (CIAO)
1- OPENING REMARKS
Brief overview of previous CIAO board resignation
2- ADOPTION OF AGENDA
3- NEW MEMBERSHIP UPDATE
4- AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION
5- NOMINATIONS OF CANDIDATES
6- CANDIDATES SPEECHES
7- ELECTIONS
8- RESULTS
9- ADDRESS BY THE NEW BOARD
10- ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING
Extraordinary General Meeting of December 12, 2010
Court Interpreters Association of Ontario (CIAO)
1- OPENING REMARKS
Brief overview of previous CIAO board resignation
2- ADOPTION OF AGENDA
3- NEW MEMBERSHIP UPDATE
4- AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION
5- NOMINATIONS OF CANDIDATES
6- CANDIDATES SPEECHES
7- ELECTIONS
8- RESULTS
9- ADDRESS BY THE NEW BOARD
10- ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING
Proxy Form
Proxy Form
The undersigned, an accredited member of the Court Interpreters’ Association of Ontario (CIAO),
hereby appoints__________________________ of ____________, or failing the person appointed
above, ____________________________ of ____________, as the proxy of the undersigned to attend
and act at the ________________ meeting of the members of the said Association to be held on the
day of __________________, and at any adjournments thereof in the same manner, to the same extent
and with the same power as if the undersigned were present at the said meeting or such adjournment or
adjournments thereof.
Dated the __________ day of _______________, _________.
Signature of the accredited member Print Name
Proxy Form
The undersigned, an accredited member of the Court Interpreters’ Association of Ontario (CIAO),
hereby appoints__________________________ of ____________, or failing the person appointed
above, ____________________________ of ____________, as the proxy of the undersigned to attend
and act at the ________________ meeting of the members of the said Association to be held on the
day of __________________, and at any adjournments thereof in the same manner, to the same extent
and with the same power as if the undersigned were present at the said meeting or such adjournment or
adjournments thereof.
Dated the __________ day of _______________, _________.
Signature of
The undersigned, an accredited member of the Court Interpreters’ Association of Ontario (CIAO),
hereby appoints__________________________ of ____________, or failing the person appointed
above, ____________________________ of ____________, as the proxy of the undersigned to attend
and act at the ________________ meeting of the members of the said Association to be held on the
day of __________________, and at any adjournments thereof in the same manner, to the same extent
and with the same power as if the undersigned were present at the said meeting or such adjournment or
adjournments thereof.
Dated the __________ day of _______________, _________.
Signature of the accredited member Print Name
Proxy Form
The undersigned, an accredited member of the Court Interpreters’ Association of Ontario (CIAO),
hereby appoints__________________________ of ____________, or failing the person appointed
above, ____________________________ of ____________, as the proxy of the undersigned to attend
and act at the ________________ meeting of the members of the said Association to be held on the
day of __________________, and at any adjournments thereof in the same manner, to the same extent
and with the same power as if the undersigned were present at the said meeting or such adjournment or
adjournments thereof.
Dated the __________ day of _______________, _________.
Signature of
CIAO Constitution Clauses to Be Amended
CIAO Constitution Clauses to Be Amended
Present Clause in force:
6.01 Definition: The CIAO Board of Directors shall be comprised of the Association’s elected
Officers and the Immediate Past President.
Proposed New Clause: (“and the Immediate Past President” to be deleted)
6.01 - The CIAO Board of Directors shall be comprised of the Association’s elected Officers.
Present Clause in force:
6.02 Number and Titles: “The total number of the CIAO Board of Directors shall not
exceed ten (10). The minimum shall be six (6): President, Immediate Past President, Vice-
President, Secretary, Treasurer, Director in charge of Membership, and four (4) Directors at
large.”
Proposed New Clause: (“Immediate Past President” to be deleted)
6.02 “The total number of the CIAO Board of Directors shall not exceed ten (10). The
minimum shall be six (6): President, Vice-President, Secretary, Treasurer, Director in
charge of Membership, and four (4) Directors at large.”
Present Clause in force:
6.03 Qualifications, Election, and Term of Office
(a) Qualifications: A candidate for CIAO Board for Directors must be an accredited
member of the Association for at least the preceding twelve (12) months and cannot
be a board member of another professional Interpreters’ or Translators’ Association
or an employee of the Crown in a managerial position.
A candidate for the office of President shall have served for at least one (1) year as a
Member of the Board at the time of election.
Proposed New Clause: (“accredited member of the Association for at least the preceding
twelve (12) months” and the entire Second Paragraph to be deleted)
6.03 Qualifications, Election, and Term of Office
(a) Qualifications: A candidate for CIAO Board of Directors must be a CIAO member
listed in the registry of freelance interpreters of the Ministry of the Attorney General
and cannot be a board member of another professional Interpreters’ or Translators’
Association or an employee of the Crown in a managerial position.
Requested By:
1- Mohammad Mashari
2- Mani Velupillai
3- Amin Shoukri
4- Candiah Nadarajah
5- Anthony Anthonipillai
6- Shaminder Jhooty
7- Amirthalingam Chanmugalingam
8- David Gnanaratnam
9- Juliana Arasaratnam
10- Amirthalingam Chanmugalingam
11- Rajee Sabaratnam
12- Cecilia Arce-Conover
13- Florinda Peschisolido
14- Saghi Jaihoon
15- Hamid Rezvani
16- Faezeh Kashaninejad
17- Morteza Abdolalian
18- Alex Medviadyuk
19- Joseph Gunaratnam
20- Siva Thiyagarajah
21- Bahram Kashani
Present Clause in force:
6.01 Definition: The CIAO Board of Directors shall be comprised of the Association’s elected
Officers and the Immediate Past President.
Proposed New Clause: (“and the Immediate Past President” to be deleted)
6.01 - The CIAO Board of Directors shall be comprised of the Association’s elected Officers.
Present Clause in force:
6.02 Number and Titles: “The total number of the CIAO Board of Directors shall not
exceed ten (10). The minimum shall be six (6): President, Immediate Past President, Vice-
President, Secretary, Treasurer, Director in charge of Membership, and four (4) Directors at
large.”
Proposed New Clause: (“Immediate Past President” to be deleted)
6.02 “The total number of the CIAO Board of Directors shall not exceed ten (10). The
minimum shall be six (6): President, Vice-President, Secretary, Treasurer, Director in
charge of Membership, and four (4) Directors at large.”
Present Clause in force:
6.03 Qualifications, Election, and Term of Office
(a) Qualifications: A candidate for CIAO Board for Directors must be an accredited
member of the Association for at least the preceding twelve (12) months and cannot
be a board member of another professional Interpreters’ or Translators’ Association
or an employee of the Crown in a managerial position.
A candidate for the office of President shall have served for at least one (1) year as a
Member of the Board at the time of election.
Proposed New Clause: (“accredited member of the Association for at least the preceding
twelve (12) months” and the entire Second Paragraph to be deleted)
6.03 Qualifications, Election, and Term of Office
(a) Qualifications: A candidate for CIAO Board of Directors must be a CIAO member
listed in the registry of freelance interpreters of the Ministry of the Attorney General
and cannot be a board member of another professional Interpreters’ or Translators’
Association or an employee of the Crown in a managerial position.
Requested By:
1- Mohammad Mashari
2- Mani Velupillai
3- Amin Shoukri
4- Candiah Nadarajah
5- Anthony Anthonipillai
6- Shaminder Jhooty
7- Amirthalingam Chanmugalingam
8- David Gnanaratnam
9- Juliana Arasaratnam
10- Amirthalingam Chanmugalingam
11- Rajee Sabaratnam
12- Cecilia Arce-Conover
13- Florinda Peschisolido
14- Saghi Jaihoon
15- Hamid Rezvani
16- Faezeh Kashaninejad
17- Morteza Abdolalian
18- Alex Medviadyuk
19- Joseph Gunaratnam
20- Siva Thiyagarajah
21- Bahram Kashani
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Thank you for your interest in the “Building on your interpreting skills workshop”.
If you did not have the opportunity to participate in the ‘Building on your interpreting skills’ workshops in May, the entire series will be offered in Brampton again on June 26 and 27, 2010. For all those who participated last week, there will be a follow up session with new materials on terminology, sight translation and consecutive interpreting, on Friday evening, June 25.
The cost of the four-session series will be about $320 and the new session on Friday evening will be $75. We are holding the same price as the May workshops.
Detailed information and registration forms will be sent out in the next couple of days.
Yolanda S. Hobrough
Certified Translator and Interpreter
STIBC-ATIO-US FCCI
The Language Bureau
Translators and Interpreters
616 - 938 Howe Street
Vancouver , BC , Canada ,
V6Z 1N9
Tel: 604-263-9923
Fax: 604-263-9942
If you did not have the opportunity to participate in the ‘Building on your interpreting skills’ workshops in May, the entire series will be offered in Brampton again on June 26 and 27, 2010. For all those who participated last week, there will be a follow up session with new materials on terminology, sight translation and consecutive interpreting, on Friday evening, June 25.
The cost of the four-session series will be about $320 and the new session on Friday evening will be $75. We are holding the same price as the May workshops.
Detailed information and registration forms will be sent out in the next couple of days.
Yolanda S. Hobrough
Certified Translator and Interpreter
STIBC-ATIO-US FCCI
The Language Bureau
Translators and Interpreters
616 - 938 Howe Street
Vancouver , BC , Canada ,
V6Z 1N9
Tel: 604-263-9923
Fax: 604-263-9942
Saturday, May 22, 2010
I would like to add one more issue to the list. Recently, Oshawa court does not recognize interpreter's ID. In order to get into court, interpreters must go to line up, empty their pockets and bodily searched. Soon other courts will follow. In courts we are no body. If this is not discrimination please let me know what it is??
.............
.............
Friday, May 21, 2010
Dear .....,
Please forward this e mail to other interpretere asking for their input, should they have any info about the subject.
Mr. ......, the .... Interpreter has suggested that the Interpreters issue is an issue of Human Rights. My understanding is that he believes that Interpreters have been put in this position (wages, conditions of work, rights and benefits or lack of rights and benefits..etc) because, among other reasons, they are predominantly of third world origin. They have been subjected to systemic discrimination, deprived of any right to negotiate, their association's requests to communicate with the ministry were ignored, they were asked humiliating questions -about their test results and accreditation- in the court room, in public, that deprived them of respect and self esteem.
This is just an introduction to start debate that may take this idea to fruition. This may lead to court case in the human rights tribunal. What do you think. Let us talk before you take any written action. Thanks.
signed by........
Do you think the interpreters issues (All including the unpopular test ) with Ministry of Attorney General are human rights issues? members and non-members of the association who read this question please go to comments section below /open it and answer it/write just YES / NO and remember to change your ID then post it.Thanks
Please forward this e mail to other interpretere asking for their input, should they have any info about the subject.
Mr. ......, the .... Interpreter has suggested that the Interpreters issue is an issue of Human Rights. My understanding is that he believes that Interpreters have been put in this position (wages, conditions of work, rights and benefits or lack of rights and benefits..etc) because, among other reasons, they are predominantly of third world origin. They have been subjected to systemic discrimination, deprived of any right to negotiate, their association's requests to communicate with the ministry were ignored, they were asked humiliating questions -about their test results and accreditation- in the court room, in public, that deprived them of respect and self esteem.
This is just an introduction to start debate that may take this idea to fruition. This may lead to court case in the human rights tribunal. What do you think. Let us talk before you take any written action. Thanks.
signed by........
Do you think the interpreters issues (All including the unpopular test ) with Ministry of Attorney General are human rights issues? members and non-members of the association who read this question please go to comments section below /open it and answer it/write just YES / NO and remember to change your ID then post it.Thanks
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Dear members,
One of our member announced a sad news :
Amal, the Assyrian-Arabic interpreter passed away few days ago. If anyone knows anything about her memorial services, ... please let us know. maybe we can put her picture... on the board in any of the interpreters rooms.
Our condolence to her family members and friends. please if you have a picture or any comments and memories from her email us or let us know. Thanks
One of our member announced a sad news :
Amal, the Assyrian-Arabic interpreter passed away few days ago. If anyone knows anything about her memorial services, ... please let us know. maybe we can put her picture... on the board in any of the interpreters rooms.
Our condolence to her family members and friends. please if you have a picture or any comments and memories from her email us or let us know. Thanks
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Members of CIAO met on Saturday May the 8th at City Hall again.
Picture was taken by one of the Association member and by a cell phone. Sorry if the picture is not clear.
Members of CIAO met again on Saturday May the 8th from 1-3pm and discussed on various issues. The meeting decided first a letter be send to the Minister of Attorny General by our lawyer and then we will decide what action we are going to take.
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Dear Fellow Interpreters,
Please note that there is an interpreters’ meeting on Saturday May 8 at 1:00 PM at the New City Hall.
It is very important that all interpreters attend this meeting. In order to achieve anything, we need to take a decisive action soon, and in order to take an action, we need everybody’s active participation, your participation.
Please check the attached files for a summary of the discussions and decisions made in the last meeting (April 24) and the agenda for the next meeting
Please try your best to attend. Thank you.
Wishing you Good luck.
Please note that there is an interpreters’ meeting on Saturday May 8 at 1:00 PM at the New City Hall.
It is very important that all interpreters attend this meeting. In order to achieve anything, we need to take a decisive action soon, and in order to take an action, we need everybody’s active participation, your participation.
Please check the attached files for a summary of the discussions and decisions made in the last meeting (April 24) and the agenda for the next meeting
Please try your best to attend. Thank you.
Wishing you Good luck.
Intro
-I am fed up with the way the Ministry has been treating interpreters. What kind of Ministry rewards interpreters with 20+ years of service, without incident ,with removal from the registry and with no offer of up-grading of skills?
Should a surgeon be sued for malpractice, the Medical authorities would not ask all surgeons to re-establish their credentials. We should have been grand-fathered in as Paralegals have been, and interpreters' perfomances could have been reviewed on a per-complaint basis. This test was a knee-jerk reaction by MAG following a huge lawsuit at the Brampton courthouse which was brought about after a shoddy interpretation caused a mistrial. This test has caused more problems than it has solved: the Criminal Lawyer's Association has now asked MAG to review all cases where there was a conviction and where the interpretation was done by an interpreter who has failed the test. Because unaccredited and conditionally accredited interpreters have been deemed not competent enough to do trials, the limited numbers of accredited interpreters will result in many cases being adjourned for long periods of time and will be used by lawyers to get their clients off on 11b's under our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The test
A) Vancouver Community College(VCC)
There are only 3 correctors for the tests, how can they know all of the various languages? VCC grads do get to see their corrected copies and review their sight translations, consecutive and simultaneous performances with a corrector. I called the Department Head, Karen Reinhold, at the College and she told me that students can appeal their results. When asked for the grounds for appeal, she told me that disagreeing with the marks is grounds enough. The only allowable grounds for our appealing our marks is that there may have been an administrative issue. Another very important point is that the course at VCC is 8-10 months long and include much classroom time and a full curriculum(which can be viewed online) whereas we were sent a boooklet a few weeks ahead of the test. This test had been in the works for a few years and this time could have been used to provide us with the adequate teachings for this test. VCC graduates also receive a certificate after passing the test.
B) The results
At the onset, in the study materials supplied by MAG, there was no mention of the "conditionally accredited" status. It stated that one needed to achieve 70%+ in all three sections in order to remain on the registry. It is my opinion that this new status was created after the fact when MAG realized that not enough interpreters had achieved a passing grade. This is CYA, cover your a@@ from the MAG. They made a mess and they are changing the rules as they go. They do not have enough fully accredited interpreters to go around so to suit their purposes, they created a new sub-category. How long had the results been known by MAG? They conveyed the results 10 months after the writing of the test. How long does it take for VCC students to receive the results of their tests? How long did MAG keep the results under wraps while they figured out what to do thereby "jeopardizing" the courts' intergrity and allowing "below par" interpretation to continue? It will be interesting to note the delay for the results of the second round of testing... I have been asked many times to do trials even though I am only "conditionally" accredited. So which is it? Am I good enough or am I not? This just doesn't any sense.
As with all of this whole process of testing, it seems not much thought was given to the effect the results might have in the long term. No contingency plan had been put in place. In the cover letter of the results materials sent, they mention that experts in the field had been consulted prior to this whole process. Who are these experts? It adds insult to injury when MAG requires of us really high standards and then in the correspondence sent to us to inform us of our results, one can count 11 punctuation errors, 5 typos and 1 sentence structure error.
What can we do?
-We can request that MAG provide all interpreters who failed to reach the 70%+ mark be paid a 2-week, accelerated, intensive training session, the equivalent to a condensed version of the course offered at VCC(which is 8 months in duration), along with all of the necessary prep materials, at the end of which we could be given the opportunity to write the test. As stated, the VCC program is months long whereas we were given the test materials
mere weeks prior to testing.(I have a letter to Ms. Chow and Ms. Bristo requesting materials for study and emails to Ms. Chow requesting specific lexicons for test preparation)
-We need to demand from MAG: tools, up-to-date materials, regularly scheduled seminars, paid preparation time, lexicons and information on matter prior to court date. I have emails to Mr. Bernier at Superior Court downtown where I request information on a Class Proceeding I was scheduled to interpret. Mr. Bernier requested information from the parties on my behalf and was flat-out told that none would be forthcoming...
-For the long-term: set up a tier system whereby interpreters are gauged by skill level and areas where they have the most experience. Interpreters who take-on difficult trial matters should get paid a higher salary than those who merely set-dates or take on matters to be spoken to etc.
-We need to write Alison Hedden at Alison.Hedden@ontario.ca and request our marks be disclosed to us. I know of interpreters who did manage to obtain their marks from her but then, it was said at the meeting that there had been a change in policy and tjhat she would no longer supply the marks. This is another manifestation of the fact that the MAG is making things up as it goes.
-Appeal the decision. There was no slang on this test therefore no way for them to measure the extent of the skill of the interpreter in their particular language or in English for that matter. The section in the study materials supplied by MAG on weapons-related terminology is so "hermetique" that I highly doubt that any lawyer or the best among us interpreters could find the equivalent terminology in the target language(unless one had been involved in a lengthy proceeding on such issues). I would request to see the terminology(or lexicons) used to correct this section of the study materials...
-It was unequivocally stated that the second round of testing was adjusted and had a slower speed for the simultaneous portion of the test (160wpm from 180wpm). That fact, if verifiable, is enough in itself to be grounds for a successful appeal(and another sign that MAG is making things up as they go).
-We need to hold rotating strikes at different locations, different times, where word of such is spread via blog to all interpreters and where media is called. Our position needs to be clearly enunciated with a prepared statement and where a representative is named to speak to the press. We need to have a plan for the long-term, as one day of striking may not be enough for us to be heard. We need contigency plans. We need to send a copy of the statement of our position to MAG, the Bar Association, the Press etc...
-We need to let people know that the reason for the re-testing was ONE bad interpretation, that the test was unfair, flawed and that this test had been available through the VCC since 1979 and therefore, it should be the MAG on the hotseat for not putting in place adequate training and not interpreters, who do their best with what they are given.
-The public needs to understand that the way MAG reacted to the Brampton lawsuit has caused more problems than it has solved. That they have used interpreters as scapegoats for their own ineptitude in providing us with the basics to do our work in the most professional manner. That this testing will result in more lawsuits and more criminals getting off the hook because lawyers will be invoking 11b of the Charter.
-Even though coordinators will schedule conditionally accredited interpreters to do trials because of the shortage of fully accredited interpreters, we need to refuse to do them, on principle. Trials are not on the list of what conditionals are supposedly good enough to do, therefore if you are not good enough, you don't, out of necessity ,become better because the courts are short-staffed.
-Perhaps we need to look at paying monthly contributions in order to have someone who is paid for to look after our interests, some of these funds could even be used to obtain legal advice. Another option would be to join a bigger organization, a professional organization or find out how we can somehow unionise. We obtain information on the steps necessary to achieve such.
-Individual courthouses each have their own budget allocations for interpreters. If the budget for interpreters was to be more of a global one, it may be more cost-effective for the gov't to have more of us on contract because then courthouses could "share" a contracted interpreter.
-We need to demand to be included in all decisions which will have an effect on us.
-we need to hold MAG accountable for not providing us with the materials, the training, the upgrading, the periodical gauging of our skills, for not allowing interpreters preparation time and giving us the information on the cases we will be working on.
-Noone else's skill level qualifications and performance record,as courtroom players,is being questioned publicly on the stand. How about asking lawyers to tell the court how many cases they have won, lost, how long they have been practising, what marks they achieved at the Bar Exam etc... How about we ask Clerks and Registrars similar questions? How about asking judges how many of their decisions have been appealed?
Other Issues
-Our invoices need to be processed in a timely fashion where we can expect payment within 2 weeks of work performed. Whenever office staff go on holidays, our invoices sit on their desks and wait for staff to return to be processed. Some courthouses are very effective when it comes to invoice processing while others are less than. Procedures for processing need to be established and streamlined across the board for all courthouses. Staff can expect to be paid in a timely fashion, why shouldn't we?
-Cancellation fees: we should not accept to schedule lengthy trials weeks ahead of time as they usually are settled within a few days and we only then get measly cancellation fees and may have refused countless assignments for the same time slots in the meantime. Should we get scheduled for a 2-week trial, then we should get guarantees for those days.
-Tools of the trade: we need up-to-date lexicons, seminars with practice exercises on specific subjects(bail, family court etc..), preparation time and information for matters which will be labour intensive.
-We need to educate the court as to our role.
Conclusion
-We need to liaise with MAG, the Bar Association and Union experts.
-We need to communicate with unionised court interpreters from other provinces to find out how they formed a union. We need to find out what percentage of the interpreters in other provinces are staff or contract employees? What are their wages? Training schedules? What materials are provided?
-We need to stick together, communicate as a group and not forget we are all on the same team. Solidarity.
-We need to be proud and stand up for ourselves. Let this be a wake-up call. Let's organize and be less vulnerable. We have a never before available way to communicate amongst ourselves: Morteza's blog.
-We need to write Alison Hedden and ask for our results and appeal our results as some sort of Class Appeal.
-The judicial system needs to realize that we, as interpreters, have too big of a responsibility if our mistakes can cause mistrials and multi-million lawsuits although we are expected to show up without any tools or regular upgrading of our skill set. Judges' errors in law are cause for appeal. Noone gets tested, their livelihood hanging in the balance. We get paid a pittance and are expected to be encyclopaedic in our knowledge. So much responsibility, so little respect, so little pay.
N.B. these notes were prepared in haste so please pardon my mistakes....
-I am fed up with the way the Ministry has been treating interpreters. What kind of Ministry rewards interpreters with 20+ years of service, without incident ,with removal from the registry and with no offer of up-grading of skills?
Should a surgeon be sued for malpractice, the Medical authorities would not ask all surgeons to re-establish their credentials. We should have been grand-fathered in as Paralegals have been, and interpreters' perfomances could have been reviewed on a per-complaint basis. This test was a knee-jerk reaction by MAG following a huge lawsuit at the Brampton courthouse which was brought about after a shoddy interpretation caused a mistrial. This test has caused more problems than it has solved: the Criminal Lawyer's Association has now asked MAG to review all cases where there was a conviction and where the interpretation was done by an interpreter who has failed the test. Because unaccredited and conditionally accredited interpreters have been deemed not competent enough to do trials, the limited numbers of accredited interpreters will result in many cases being adjourned for long periods of time and will be used by lawyers to get their clients off on 11b's under our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The test
A) Vancouver Community College(VCC)
There are only 3 correctors for the tests, how can they know all of the various languages? VCC grads do get to see their corrected copies and review their sight translations, consecutive and simultaneous performances with a corrector. I called the Department Head, Karen Reinhold, at the College and she told me that students can appeal their results. When asked for the grounds for appeal, she told me that disagreeing with the marks is grounds enough. The only allowable grounds for our appealing our marks is that there may have been an administrative issue. Another very important point is that the course at VCC is 8-10 months long and include much classroom time and a full curriculum(which can be viewed online) whereas we were sent a boooklet a few weeks ahead of the test. This test had been in the works for a few years and this time could have been used to provide us with the adequate teachings for this test. VCC graduates also receive a certificate after passing the test.
B) The results
At the onset, in the study materials supplied by MAG, there was no mention of the "conditionally accredited" status. It stated that one needed to achieve 70%+ in all three sections in order to remain on the registry. It is my opinion that this new status was created after the fact when MAG realized that not enough interpreters had achieved a passing grade. This is CYA, cover your a@@ from the MAG. They made a mess and they are changing the rules as they go. They do not have enough fully accredited interpreters to go around so to suit their purposes, they created a new sub-category. How long had the results been known by MAG? They conveyed the results 10 months after the writing of the test. How long does it take for VCC students to receive the results of their tests? How long did MAG keep the results under wraps while they figured out what to do thereby "jeopardizing" the courts' intergrity and allowing "below par" interpretation to continue? It will be interesting to note the delay for the results of the second round of testing... I have been asked many times to do trials even though I am only "conditionally" accredited. So which is it? Am I good enough or am I not? This just doesn't any sense.
As with all of this whole process of testing, it seems not much thought was given to the effect the results might have in the long term. No contingency plan had been put in place. In the cover letter of the results materials sent, they mention that experts in the field had been consulted prior to this whole process. Who are these experts? It adds insult to injury when MAG requires of us really high standards and then in the correspondence sent to us to inform us of our results, one can count 11 punctuation errors, 5 typos and 1 sentence structure error.
What can we do?
-We can request that MAG provide all interpreters who failed to reach the 70%+ mark be paid a 2-week, accelerated, intensive training session, the equivalent to a condensed version of the course offered at VCC(which is 8 months in duration), along with all of the necessary prep materials, at the end of which we could be given the opportunity to write the test. As stated, the VCC program is months long whereas we were given the test materials
mere weeks prior to testing.(I have a letter to Ms. Chow and Ms. Bristo requesting materials for study and emails to Ms. Chow requesting specific lexicons for test preparation)
-We need to demand from MAG: tools, up-to-date materials, regularly scheduled seminars, paid preparation time, lexicons and information on matter prior to court date. I have emails to Mr. Bernier at Superior Court downtown where I request information on a Class Proceeding I was scheduled to interpret. Mr. Bernier requested information from the parties on my behalf and was flat-out told that none would be forthcoming...
-For the long-term: set up a tier system whereby interpreters are gauged by skill level and areas where they have the most experience. Interpreters who take-on difficult trial matters should get paid a higher salary than those who merely set-dates or take on matters to be spoken to etc.
-We need to write Alison Hedden at Alison.Hedden@ontario.ca and request our marks be disclosed to us. I know of interpreters who did manage to obtain their marks from her but then, it was said at the meeting that there had been a change in policy and tjhat she would no longer supply the marks. This is another manifestation of the fact that the MAG is making things up as it goes.
-Appeal the decision. There was no slang on this test therefore no way for them to measure the extent of the skill of the interpreter in their particular language or in English for that matter. The section in the study materials supplied by MAG on weapons-related terminology is so "hermetique" that I highly doubt that any lawyer or the best among us interpreters could find the equivalent terminology in the target language(unless one had been involved in a lengthy proceeding on such issues). I would request to see the terminology(or lexicons) used to correct this section of the study materials...
-It was unequivocally stated that the second round of testing was adjusted and had a slower speed for the simultaneous portion of the test (160wpm from 180wpm). That fact, if verifiable, is enough in itself to be grounds for a successful appeal(and another sign that MAG is making things up as they go).
-We need to hold rotating strikes at different locations, different times, where word of such is spread via blog to all interpreters and where media is called. Our position needs to be clearly enunciated with a prepared statement and where a representative is named to speak to the press. We need to have a plan for the long-term, as one day of striking may not be enough for us to be heard. We need contigency plans. We need to send a copy of the statement of our position to MAG, the Bar Association, the Press etc...
-We need to let people know that the reason for the re-testing was ONE bad interpretation, that the test was unfair, flawed and that this test had been available through the VCC since 1979 and therefore, it should be the MAG on the hotseat for not putting in place adequate training and not interpreters, who do their best with what they are given.
-The public needs to understand that the way MAG reacted to the Brampton lawsuit has caused more problems than it has solved. That they have used interpreters as scapegoats for their own ineptitude in providing us with the basics to do our work in the most professional manner. That this testing will result in more lawsuits and more criminals getting off the hook because lawyers will be invoking 11b of the Charter.
-Even though coordinators will schedule conditionally accredited interpreters to do trials because of the shortage of fully accredited interpreters, we need to refuse to do them, on principle. Trials are not on the list of what conditionals are supposedly good enough to do, therefore if you are not good enough, you don't, out of necessity ,become better because the courts are short-staffed.
-Perhaps we need to look at paying monthly contributions in order to have someone who is paid for to look after our interests, some of these funds could even be used to obtain legal advice. Another option would be to join a bigger organization, a professional organization or find out how we can somehow unionise. We obtain information on the steps necessary to achieve such.
-Individual courthouses each have their own budget allocations for interpreters. If the budget for interpreters was to be more of a global one, it may be more cost-effective for the gov't to have more of us on contract because then courthouses could "share" a contracted interpreter.
-We need to demand to be included in all decisions which will have an effect on us.
-we need to hold MAG accountable for not providing us with the materials, the training, the upgrading, the periodical gauging of our skills, for not allowing interpreters preparation time and giving us the information on the cases we will be working on.
-Noone else's skill level qualifications and performance record,as courtroom players,is being questioned publicly on the stand. How about asking lawyers to tell the court how many cases they have won, lost, how long they have been practising, what marks they achieved at the Bar Exam etc... How about we ask Clerks and Registrars similar questions? How about asking judges how many of their decisions have been appealed?
Other Issues
-Our invoices need to be processed in a timely fashion where we can expect payment within 2 weeks of work performed. Whenever office staff go on holidays, our invoices sit on their desks and wait for staff to return to be processed. Some courthouses are very effective when it comes to invoice processing while others are less than. Procedures for processing need to be established and streamlined across the board for all courthouses. Staff can expect to be paid in a timely fashion, why shouldn't we?
-Cancellation fees: we should not accept to schedule lengthy trials weeks ahead of time as they usually are settled within a few days and we only then get measly cancellation fees and may have refused countless assignments for the same time slots in the meantime. Should we get scheduled for a 2-week trial, then we should get guarantees for those days.
-Tools of the trade: we need up-to-date lexicons, seminars with practice exercises on specific subjects(bail, family court etc..), preparation time and information for matters which will be labour intensive.
-We need to educate the court as to our role.
Conclusion
-We need to liaise with MAG, the Bar Association and Union experts.
-We need to communicate with unionised court interpreters from other provinces to find out how they formed a union. We need to find out what percentage of the interpreters in other provinces are staff or contract employees? What are their wages? Training schedules? What materials are provided?
-We need to stick together, communicate as a group and not forget we are all on the same team. Solidarity.
-We need to be proud and stand up for ourselves. Let this be a wake-up call. Let's organize and be less vulnerable. We have a never before available way to communicate amongst ourselves: Morteza's blog.
-We need to write Alison Hedden and ask for our results and appeal our results as some sort of Class Appeal.
-The judicial system needs to realize that we, as interpreters, have too big of a responsibility if our mistakes can cause mistrials and multi-million lawsuits although we are expected to show up without any tools or regular upgrading of our skill set. Judges' errors in law are cause for appeal. Noone gets tested, their livelihood hanging in the balance. We get paid a pittance and are expected to be encyclopaedic in our knowledge. So much responsibility, so little respect, so little pay.
N.B. these notes were prepared in haste so please pardon my mistakes....
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Court Interpreters' Association of Ontario
Mailing address: 17 Wycombe Road, North York, ON. M3M 2W6 • Fax: (416) 398-2715
e-mail: stellarahman@hotmail.com • www.ontariocourtinterpreters.ca
Minutes from last meeting-
Meeting Notes of the emergency general meeting of the Court Interpreters held on April 24th, 2010 in
Committee Rm. # 1 at New City Hall, 100 Queen St. W.
1. Stella provided a brief summary of the steps that were taken by CIAO since 2006 onwards
and explained CIAO’s efforts to work collaboratively with MAG. Although CIAO has
been recognized by MAG, MAG kept CIAO informed but not involved and rejected our
participation or input.
2. A Form To File An Appeal ( Appeal Form) developed by CIAO was circulated and all court members who
have been conditionally accredited and unaccredited were encouraged to file an appeal
within 60 days of receiving their test results on the following grounds:
• Sight translation – not enough time for review and delivery
• Consecutive interpretation – nowhere in the world recorded tests are used other than
for conference interpreters. There were too many sentences in a row with a lot of
names, nouns, numbers, events, etc.
• Simultaneous interpretation – the speed was unrealistic and extremely fast. The
speaker was speaking @ 190/200 words/min. The normal speed of a speaker
speaking the same language is 140 words/min. and when an interpreter is present,
the speed is reduced to 120 words/min.
3. A Form for Request for Access to Information under FIPPA developed by CIAO was
circulated. A cheque of $5.00 payable to the Minister of Finance needs to be sent together
with FIPPA application.
4. Highlights of discussion:
• Ask MAG for a 2 wk. intensive paid training and move up the accreditation level
• Higher pay for different accreditation levels
• Possible strike – how do we ensure complete participation?
• Continue media coverage
• Draft a statement re: our position
• Monthly contribution ? Union
• Retain a lawyer ? labor lawyer
5. A 7-member sub-committee was struck to look at:
• Lobbying with the Minister of Attorney General
• Lobbying with the Premier
• Lobbying with the judges and crowns
• Draft a statement for any media coverage
• Possible strategies and a date for a strike
• Retaining a lawyer
6. The need to create a fund for future legal expenses was agreed upon and everybody
present was encouraged to pay their membership dues of $35.00/year and also, think
seriously about a donation for legal fees.
Mailing address: 17 Wycombe Road, North York, ON. M3M 2W6 • Fax: (416) 398-2715
e-mail: stellarahman@hotmail.com • www.ontariocourtinterpreters.ca
Minutes from last meeting-
Meeting Notes of the emergency general meeting of the Court Interpreters held on April 24th, 2010 in
Committee Rm. # 1 at New City Hall, 100 Queen St. W.
1. Stella provided a brief summary of the steps that were taken by CIAO since 2006 onwards
and explained CIAO’s efforts to work collaboratively with MAG. Although CIAO has
been recognized by MAG, MAG kept CIAO informed but not involved and rejected our
participation or input.
2. A Form To File An Appeal ( Appeal Form) developed by CIAO was circulated and all court members who
have been conditionally accredited and unaccredited were encouraged to file an appeal
within 60 days of receiving their test results on the following grounds:
• Sight translation – not enough time for review and delivery
• Consecutive interpretation – nowhere in the world recorded tests are used other than
for conference interpreters. There were too many sentences in a row with a lot of
names, nouns, numbers, events, etc.
• Simultaneous interpretation – the speed was unrealistic and extremely fast. The
speaker was speaking @ 190/200 words/min. The normal speed of a speaker
speaking the same language is 140 words/min. and when an interpreter is present,
the speed is reduced to 120 words/min.
3. A Form for Request for Access to Information under FIPPA developed by CIAO was
circulated. A cheque of $5.00 payable to the Minister of Finance needs to be sent together
with FIPPA application.
4. Highlights of discussion:
• Ask MAG for a 2 wk. intensive paid training and move up the accreditation level
• Higher pay for different accreditation levels
• Possible strike – how do we ensure complete participation?
• Continue media coverage
• Draft a statement re: our position
• Monthly contribution ? Union
• Retain a lawyer ? labor lawyer
5. A 7-member sub-committee was struck to look at:
• Lobbying with the Minister of Attorney General
• Lobbying with the Premier
• Lobbying with the judges and crowns
• Draft a statement for any media coverage
• Possible strategies and a date for a strike
• Retaining a lawyer
6. The need to create a fund for future legal expenses was agreed upon and everybody
present was encouraged to pay their membership dues of $35.00/year and also, think
seriously about a donation for legal fees.
Court Interpreters' Association of Ontario
Mailing address: 17 Wycombe Road, North York, ON. M3M 2W6 • Fax: (416) 398-2715
e-mail: stellarahman@hotmail.com • www.ontariocourtinterpreters.ca
A TIME TO DECIDE!
EMERGENCY COURT
INTERPRETERS MEETING #2 on the fallout of the unjust retesting
and results
Special Guest : John Weisdorf, Q.C., Barrister & Solicitor
When:
Saturday, May 8, 2010
1 PM to 3:30 PM
Where:
Committee Room #2, 2nd Floor
New City Hall
100 Queen Street W., Toronto
Calling All Court Interpreters
(Freelance and Staff)
Please remember to bring your cheque books for Annual Membership dues of $35.00,
and Donations towards legal fees, payable to CIAO
Mailing address: 17 Wycombe Road, North York, ON. M3M 2W6 • Fax: (416) 398-2715
e-mail: stellarahman@hotmail.com • www.ontariocourtinterpreters.ca
A TIME TO DECIDE!
EMERGENCY COURT
INTERPRETERS MEETING #2 on the fallout of the unjust retesting
and results
Special Guest : John Weisdorf, Q.C., Barrister & Solicitor
When:
Saturday, May 8, 2010
1 PM to 3:30 PM
Where:
Committee Room #2, 2nd Floor
New City Hall
100 Queen Street W., Toronto
Calling All Court Interpreters
(Freelance and Staff)
Please remember to bring your cheque books for Annual Membership dues of $35.00,
and Donations towards legal fees, payable to CIAO
Sunday, May 2, 2010
All the comments by interpreters will be added in this post :
1-We all must sign a petition.The rest of interpreters who were not tested yet should refuseto be tested.United we bargain, divided we beg!!!!!
2-
Dear Friends,
(...) and (...) were discussing the latest CBC article regarding interpreters and he suggested that we should share it with everybody. Here is the argument. Please feel free to give us your suggestions. I would emphasize the we should focus on practical suggestions for action rather than just self-serving arguments and sympathy or complain with the interpreters’ cause.
Thank you,
(...)
April 29, 2010
Dear Fellow Interpreters,
Please do not forget to check the comments at the end of the article. They are very “enlightening” and give you a pretty good idea of what the general public thinks about us, interpreters—it is scary!
(...)
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/04/16/court-interpreters.html
April 29, 2010
(...)
Comments are very interesting. It shows no understanding of the legal importance of understanding the procedure and the universal rights of citizens. Some people subsidize healthcare, transportation and welfare systems without using any of them. Otherwise we will have rampant crimes and hatred.
(...)
April 29, 2010
(...)
Dear (...),
You are right: “These people subsidize many services without using any of them, such as public transportation, etc...” and they don’t realise it or they don’t mind it. The argument is kind of trivial and I am not going to bother with it.
These comments are the “redneck-type” of remarks along the line of: foreigners (immigrants) come to “our” country, abuse our welfare system, commit crimes etc..., and “our” government pays for them out of “our tax money”. They have the same attitude toward us, interpreters, because they perceive us as a part of abusing “foreigners” or “immigrants”, and everything that goes with it. No wonder, we are treated with such resentment and in such condescending and humiliating manners by a lot of court and Ministry staff. I can’t help feeling that they hate our guts.
April 29, 2010
(...)
I guess we need to re-introduce ourselves i.e. we need a public relations campaign. It is also unfair to say we need this or that without paying for what we want to get whether in terms of money or effort, participation.
You only get what you pay for.
(...)
April 29, 2010
Dear (...),
Exactly, you put your finger on the right spot: We have to pay for what we want to get or achieve, in terms of money, effort, participation, etc... Are we interpreters really ready to pay for it? If not, then we should just shut up and take whatever they give us, including humiliation.
(...)
We interpreters all agree on these self-serving arguments, could argue for ever on how just our cause is and, of course, endorse and applaud one another. It is important to make the Ministry agree with us and give in to our demands. And that, as you said, requires effort, money, participation, etc...
The Ministry seems to be adamant (as always) on their decision. They don’t want to lose face. At this stage there is no face saving course of action and we are forced to swallow the venom they have cooked up for us: It can’t go on like this; something or someone has to give!
Pay attention to this part of the CBC report:
In a statement sent to CBC News, the ministry said it is recruiting new interpreters to help fill holes. And it defended the examinations.
"The new tests are specific to courts and are based on actual court documents and trial transcripts from Ontario court proceedings," the ministry said.
It appears that the Ministry is not backing off.
On Interpreters’ Participation:
According to the official numbers announced in the meeting (on Saturday, April 24th), out of 225 interpreters who sat for the test last year, only 46 have passed it fully and 69 passed conditionally. That means 110 interpreters failed completely and therefore their livelihood is gone. Yet, only 49 interpreters attended the meeting—I counted them carefully—and I could say more than half of them were the ones who have passed the test, fully, conditionally, or they were staff interpreters whose jobs are secure and didn’t even need to be there. Is this how much the failed ones care about their livelihood???
I got totally disappointed in our colleagues and disheartened. I began thinking: maybe the successful interpreters passed the test because of this positive attitude—despite the harshness of the test.
What we need and the only thing that could solve our problems is: BARGAINING POWER. And for that we need TO ORGANIZE and for that we need PARTICIPATION.
(...)
2-
Dear Friends,
(...) and (...) were discussing the latest CBC article regarding interpreters and he suggested that we should share it with everybody. Here is the argument. Please feel free to give us your suggestions. I would emphasize the we should focus on practical suggestions for action rather than just self-serving arguments and sympathy or complain with the interpreters’ cause.
Thank you,
(...)
April 29, 2010
Dear Fellow Interpreters,
Please do not forget to check the comments at the end of the article. They are very “enlightening” and give you a pretty good idea of what the general public thinks about us, interpreters—it is scary!
(...)
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/04/16/court-interpreters.html
April 29, 2010
(...)
Comments are very interesting. It shows no understanding of the legal importance of understanding the procedure and the universal rights of citizens. Some people subsidize healthcare, transportation and welfare systems without using any of them. Otherwise we will have rampant crimes and hatred.
(...)
April 29, 2010
(...)
Dear (...),
You are right: “These people subsidize many services without using any of them, such as public transportation, etc...” and they don’t realise it or they don’t mind it. The argument is kind of trivial and I am not going to bother with it.
These comments are the “redneck-type” of remarks along the line of: foreigners (immigrants) come to “our” country, abuse our welfare system, commit crimes etc..., and “our” government pays for them out of “our tax money”. They have the same attitude toward us, interpreters, because they perceive us as a part of abusing “foreigners” or “immigrants”, and everything that goes with it. No wonder, we are treated with such resentment and in such condescending and humiliating manners by a lot of court and Ministry staff. I can’t help feeling that they hate our guts.
April 29, 2010
(...)
I guess we need to re-introduce ourselves i.e. we need a public relations campaign. It is also unfair to say we need this or that without paying for what we want to get whether in terms of money or effort, participation.
You only get what you pay for.
(...)
April 29, 2010
Dear (...),
Exactly, you put your finger on the right spot: We have to pay for what we want to get or achieve, in terms of money, effort, participation, etc... Are we interpreters really ready to pay for it? If not, then we should just shut up and take whatever they give us, including humiliation.
(...)
We interpreters all agree on these self-serving arguments, could argue for ever on how just our cause is and, of course, endorse and applaud one another. It is important to make the Ministry agree with us and give in to our demands. And that, as you said, requires effort, money, participation, etc...
The Ministry seems to be adamant (as always) on their decision. They don’t want to lose face. At this stage there is no face saving course of action and we are forced to swallow the venom they have cooked up for us: It can’t go on like this; something or someone has to give!
Pay attention to this part of the CBC report:
In a statement sent to CBC News, the ministry said it is recruiting new interpreters to help fill holes. And it defended the examinations.
"The new tests are specific to courts and are based on actual court documents and trial transcripts from Ontario court proceedings," the ministry said.
It appears that the Ministry is not backing off.
On Interpreters’ Participation:
According to the official numbers announced in the meeting (on Saturday, April 24th), out of 225 interpreters who sat for the test last year, only 46 have passed it fully and 69 passed conditionally. That means 110 interpreters failed completely and therefore their livelihood is gone. Yet, only 49 interpreters attended the meeting—I counted them carefully—and I could say more than half of them were the ones who have passed the test, fully, conditionally, or they were staff interpreters whose jobs are secure and didn’t even need to be there. Is this how much the failed ones care about their livelihood???
I got totally disappointed in our colleagues and disheartened. I began thinking: maybe the successful interpreters passed the test because of this positive attitude—despite the harshness of the test.
What we need and the only thing that could solve our problems is: BARGAINING POWER. And for that we need TO ORGANIZE and for that we need PARTICIPATION.
(...)
Friday, April 30, 2010
Court translators failing exams not reason enough to launch inquiry: Ontario AG
TORONTO - The failure of 77 Ontario court translators to pass proficiency exams is not reason enough to launch an inquiry into cases involving those interpreters that resulted in convictions, Attorney General Chris Bentley said Monday.The government would have to be handed new information or a "real concrete reason" before it would launch such a review, Bentley said in an interview."If there's some evidence, something more beyond the results of the accreditation (exams) to suggest cause for inquiry I'm sure that will be brought to our attention," Bentley said.It was revealed earlier this month that 77 of 223 court translators failed accreditation tests administered by the ministry last June. An additional one-third were given conditional approval, while several hundred more await testing.Last week the Criminal Lawyers' Association called on the government to conduct an inquiry into the matter and identify cases in which substandard court translation may have resulted in a miscarriage of justice.Association president Paul Burstein said in an interview Monday that he is disappointed the attorney general isn't reviewing the issue further.Starting with the names of translators who failed the test, the government "could go back and look at the cases where there were trials that resulted in convictions... and (get) a sense of whether or not they had enough skills to reliably interpret the evidence and proceedings," Burstein said.Only the ministry has the necessary information to conduct such inquiries, he added.The Ontario Court of Appeal has ruled previously that post-trial concerns about translation quality are not enough to call the validity of court proceedings into question.Accredited interpreters must achieve a score of 70 per cent and above overall and in each category tested, according to the ministry's website.Conditionally accredited interpreters are ones who did not reach a score of 70 per cent overall in each category, but their test score showed a high level of proficiency.The ministry website says accredited interpreters will be assigned to the more complex court matters, with conditionally accredited interpreters being assigned to other proceedings.The previous test used to accredit court interpreters in Ontario was a standard language interpretation test.The test rolled out last year, developed by Vancouver Community College, is specific to courts and based on actual court documents and trial transcripts from Ontario court proceedings, the website states."This approach ensures the tests match a realistic court interpreter experience and reflect the high level of skill and specialized terminology required for court interpretation."
Link to this article in Metro:
http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/local/article/512408--court-translators-failing-exams-not-reason-enough-to-launch-inquiry-ontario-ag
Link to this article in Metro:
http://www.metronews.ca/toronto/local/article/512408--court-translators-failing-exams-not-reason-enough-to-launch-inquiry-ontario-ag
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Hamilton & Niagara region court interpreters
Here is the blog link of Hamilton & Niagara region court interpreters:
http://www.haniinterpreters.blogspot.com/
http://www.haniinterpreters.blogspot.com/
comments on CBC's story :
1-Stellarahman:
I am the President of the Court Interpreters Association of Ontario and I have read all the comments posted on this issue. The accredited court interpreters in Ontario, as a collective body of professionals, did not present any reasonable grounds of inadequacy to the Ministry of Attorney General to necessitate re-examination of their linguistic capabilities. Similar to any other profession, individual cases of misconduct and/or negligence should have been dealt with separately and can hardly be a base to entice an overall judgment. Interestingly, the re-test was so unrealistic that interpreters with more than 20 yrs. experience failed the test - doesn't this say something?
2-Jaybird83:
For those few people going on about ASL interpreters in the courtroom, I don't think your arguments are all that valid becuase if I am not mistaken the sign language used in North America would be American Sign Language or the French equivalent and therefore I don't think anyone going on about only French or English would have a problem with a government interpreter provided it was the ASL or the French equivalent (sorry, I don't know the actual name of it).
3-Kumars wrote: "Who is paying for this translators. If you can not understand the official languages, bring your own." What if the only witbness to a crime committed against you happened to be a tourist who spoke neither English or French? Then would request a government interpreter? What if you were unfairly charged with a crime? Would you want a professional accredited interpreter or some guy off the streets? To those who are concerned about their tax dollars - does anyone know how much court interpreters earn? Anyone? If you want to save tax dollars, let's not bother with accrediting judges - or lawyers for that matter - let's not even check into their background. Court clerks too, let's save more money there, would it matter if they were unprofessional and say let a child molester go free on a technicality? Let's save tax dollars by having everyone bring their own unaccredited court staff. Could we save on the court security too by having everyone bring their own guns ? How about the cleaning staff at the courthouse, because they get more of your precious tax dollars than do the interpeters - remember to bring a mop and bucket. Well you can imagine the chaos. My point is the triviality of the tax issue. Social programs get most of your tax dollars, not court interpreters.
4-Mikeclark wrote:
Why do they need interpreters they are supposed to be fluent in our language here in Canada and if its like Quebec we even have to pay for them to learn our language. And I find this really a affront that my governments make me pay for this so they can insult me every day or cry about us not letting them run us. So send them all back to were they came from I refuse to be taxed to pay for anymore of this stupidity as they don't want to be Canadians they just want what they get for free.
5-watchingtext wrote:
Interpreting is not translation. For the interpreter, it means using both sides of the brain in a high velocity verbal excercise. You are speaking, listening to sometimes convoluted sentence structures (not all judges and lawyers are eloquent), turning them backwards and sideways into another language all the while still listening and having to make sure legal terms are precise and that the client understands clearly what is taking place.Something like playing the piano and doing calculus at the same time. Try it! Repeat every single word the newscaster says, get all dates and numbers correctly and don't miss a word for only 15 minutes - ahhhh now you get the idea,! Sorry about the headache. Now learn another language, (or try it in your mother tongue) study the dictionary of legal terms, meanings and their translation, obscure ones too, and the Latin terms (the client may not speak Latin) . Now pass the gruelling government tests for a few hours (you must pass with at least 70%) and then go to work for less than $26 per hour on a per call basis with no benefits. Enjoy! By the way - Liberal -Muslim wrote: "A good interpiter knows what the answer will be and helps the client out on the stand I would pay for an experienced interpider. " ???Allow me a few momments to recover from the shock and to pray that he is not involved with the Canadian court system in any way! This is what a court interpreter does NOT do! Repeat - does NOT do!
6-e.g.johnsmith wrote:
Remember how teachers fought so hard against being subjected to testing?
7-killerbea wrote:
Sounds like a sweep to get rid of many people who worked in the courts systems for decades, then all of a sudden, they are no longer needed or qualified?Sounds messed up to me.
8-yosh Schmengie wrote:
@jaybird83 Re: "Don't commit a crime, problem solved!"
You don't need to commit a crime in order for the police to charge you with a crime. Happens all of the time. The Court-appointed interpreters are there to ensure that the judge (or judge and jury) can accurately understand and assess the evidence of everyone (police, witnesses, and the accused) and most importantly to allow an accused person to fully understand and participate in his or her trial. Imagine bring in another country, where you don't speak the language, and you are wrongly accused of a terrible crime. Imagine not understanding a word of what is being spoken at your trial. How do you think that would feel? With your liberty and possibly your life on the line? Wouldn't you want the opportunity to be able to understand the case against you, and to be able to tell your side of the story? THAT is why we have Court-appointed interpreters. Fortunately we live in a society where we value things like fundamental justice. If you don't want to help pay for the services and facilities necessary to allow justice to be carried out, then there are many regimes in the world where, in exchange for paying less in tax, you get to give up such freedoms and liberties.
9-exasperation wrote:
A lot of the posters here seem to be missing the point that this is as much for the court's benefit as the person who doesn't speak English or French.Imagine a tourist or newly landed immigrant who are the only witness a horrible crime. "Tell us exactly what you saw." -- "Man *point* stab very bad bad bad many bleed he die" is hardly going to be sufficient testimony to convict for murder...
10-Joe Gall wrote:
This is just my observation, no data:Court interpreters have English as their second language.This article seems to be saying that some of them do not have sufficient competence in languages such as Ethiopian, but I wonder if their English isn't the problem.
11-Allen Robertson wrote:
Not to worry folks, soon they'll only need two interpreters in Canadian Courts, English and French.
I am the President of the Court Interpreters Association of Ontario and I have read all the comments posted on this issue. The accredited court interpreters in Ontario, as a collective body of professionals, did not present any reasonable grounds of inadequacy to the Ministry of Attorney General to necessitate re-examination of their linguistic capabilities. Similar to any other profession, individual cases of misconduct and/or negligence should have been dealt with separately and can hardly be a base to entice an overall judgment. Interestingly, the re-test was so unrealistic that interpreters with more than 20 yrs. experience failed the test - doesn't this say something?
2-Jaybird83:
For those few people going on about ASL interpreters in the courtroom, I don't think your arguments are all that valid becuase if I am not mistaken the sign language used in North America would be American Sign Language or the French equivalent and therefore I don't think anyone going on about only French or English would have a problem with a government interpreter provided it was the ASL or the French equivalent (sorry, I don't know the actual name of it).
3-Kumars wrote: "Who is paying for this translators. If you can not understand the official languages, bring your own." What if the only witbness to a crime committed against you happened to be a tourist who spoke neither English or French? Then would request a government interpreter? What if you were unfairly charged with a crime? Would you want a professional accredited interpreter or some guy off the streets? To those who are concerned about their tax dollars - does anyone know how much court interpreters earn? Anyone? If you want to save tax dollars, let's not bother with accrediting judges - or lawyers for that matter - let's not even check into their background. Court clerks too, let's save more money there, would it matter if they were unprofessional and say let a child molester go free on a technicality? Let's save tax dollars by having everyone bring their own unaccredited court staff. Could we save on the court security too by having everyone bring their own guns ? How about the cleaning staff at the courthouse, because they get more of your precious tax dollars than do the interpeters - remember to bring a mop and bucket. Well you can imagine the chaos. My point is the triviality of the tax issue. Social programs get most of your tax dollars, not court interpreters.
4-Mikeclark wrote:
Why do they need interpreters they are supposed to be fluent in our language here in Canada and if its like Quebec we even have to pay for them to learn our language. And I find this really a affront that my governments make me pay for this so they can insult me every day or cry about us not letting them run us. So send them all back to were they came from I refuse to be taxed to pay for anymore of this stupidity as they don't want to be Canadians they just want what they get for free.
5-watchingtext wrote:
Interpreting is not translation. For the interpreter, it means using both sides of the brain in a high velocity verbal excercise. You are speaking, listening to sometimes convoluted sentence structures (not all judges and lawyers are eloquent), turning them backwards and sideways into another language all the while still listening and having to make sure legal terms are precise and that the client understands clearly what is taking place.Something like playing the piano and doing calculus at the same time. Try it! Repeat every single word the newscaster says, get all dates and numbers correctly and don't miss a word for only 15 minutes - ahhhh now you get the idea,! Sorry about the headache. Now learn another language, (or try it in your mother tongue) study the dictionary of legal terms, meanings and their translation, obscure ones too, and the Latin terms (the client may not speak Latin) . Now pass the gruelling government tests for a few hours (you must pass with at least 70%) and then go to work for less than $26 per hour on a per call basis with no benefits. Enjoy! By the way - Liberal -Muslim wrote: "A good interpiter knows what the answer will be and helps the client out on the stand I would pay for an experienced interpider. " ???Allow me a few momments to recover from the shock and to pray that he is not involved with the Canadian court system in any way! This is what a court interpreter does NOT do! Repeat - does NOT do!
6-e.g.johnsmith wrote:
Remember how teachers fought so hard against being subjected to testing?
7-killerbea wrote:
Sounds like a sweep to get rid of many people who worked in the courts systems for decades, then all of a sudden, they are no longer needed or qualified?Sounds messed up to me.
8-yosh Schmengie wrote:
@jaybird83 Re: "Don't commit a crime, problem solved!"
You don't need to commit a crime in order for the police to charge you with a crime. Happens all of the time. The Court-appointed interpreters are there to ensure that the judge (or judge and jury) can accurately understand and assess the evidence of everyone (police, witnesses, and the accused) and most importantly to allow an accused person to fully understand and participate in his or her trial. Imagine bring in another country, where you don't speak the language, and you are wrongly accused of a terrible crime. Imagine not understanding a word of what is being spoken at your trial. How do you think that would feel? With your liberty and possibly your life on the line? Wouldn't you want the opportunity to be able to understand the case against you, and to be able to tell your side of the story? THAT is why we have Court-appointed interpreters. Fortunately we live in a society where we value things like fundamental justice. If you don't want to help pay for the services and facilities necessary to allow justice to be carried out, then there are many regimes in the world where, in exchange for paying less in tax, you get to give up such freedoms and liberties.
9-exasperation wrote:
A lot of the posters here seem to be missing the point that this is as much for the court's benefit as the person who doesn't speak English or French.Imagine a tourist or newly landed immigrant who are the only witness a horrible crime. "Tell us exactly what you saw." -- "Man *point* stab very bad bad bad many bleed he die" is hardly going to be sufficient testimony to convict for murder...
10-Joe Gall wrote:
This is just my observation, no data:Court interpreters have English as their second language.This article seems to be saying that some of them do not have sufficient competence in languages such as Ethiopian, but I wonder if their English isn't the problem.
11-Allen Robertson wrote:
Not to worry folks, soon they'll only need two interpreters in Canadian Courts, English and French.
Ontario court interpreters failing tests
Interpreters working in Ontario courts are facing new proficiency examinations. (CBC)
The use of interpreters in Ontario courtrooms could become a serious issue after about 40 per cent in the first group failed the new proficiency tests.
Ontario is testing all of its accredited interpreters.
The first group to take the tests didn't fare well as only 46 passed, 69 were given conditional credentials and 77 failed. About 600 interpreters are still to be tested.
The results mean that in the Greater Toronto Area, for example, right now there is only one fully accredited Mandarin interpreter and one fully accredited Tamil language interpreter.
Selahedin Abubaker is one of the interpreters who failed. But he has been a court translator for more than 20 years, working on cases all over Ontario.
Abubaker says he is fluent in two languages spoken in Ethiopia, but as of this week the Ministry of the Attorney General says he's no longer qualified.
No complaints
Abubaker says that over the past two decades he has never had a complaint about his work from "the justices of the peace, the judges, the clients."
He says his exam was too academic and didn't take into account the nuances of the languages he interprets.
"The speed and the pause of our language" are extremely important, he said, "and that doesn't reflect what the test is all about."
Stella Rahman, president of the Court Interpreters Association of Ontario, says the organization offered to work with the ministry to upgrade skills or train interpreters, but the ministry refused.
Courtroom co-ordinators have told Rahman they now have strict instructions to use interpreters from the accredited list first, then those with conditional credentials.
Rahman worries that some of those on the list have little court experience.
"Although the interpreter has passed the test, he or she is not competent to handle high-profile cases like murder trials," she said. "But [the court co-ordinator's] hands are tied. He has to call on that interpreter."
Bev Dowd, a Spanish interpreter who passed her test, says the fallout may be felt in the Ontario legal system for years to come.
Chaos predicted
"Lawyers are saying, 'Maybe I'll go back and say that wasn't a good interpreter, the whole decision should be overturned.' So it's going to just create chaos," said Dowd.
Some lawyers say there aren't enough qualified interpreters.
Gary Anandasangaree, who represents many clients whose first language is Tamil, said the ministry's decision could put a barrier between "people who are effectively the accused and the system."
In a statement sent to CBC News, the ministry said it is recruiting new interpreters to help fill holes. And it defended the examinations.
"The new tests are specific to courts and are based on actual court documents and trial transcripts from Ontario court proceedings," the ministry said.
"This approach ensures the tests match a realistic court interpreter experience and reflect the high level of skill and specialized terminology required for court interpretation."
This story is now closed to commenting.
The use of interpreters in Ontario courtrooms could become a serious issue after about 40 per cent in the first group failed the new proficiency tests.
Ontario is testing all of its accredited interpreters.
The first group to take the tests didn't fare well as only 46 passed, 69 were given conditional credentials and 77 failed. About 600 interpreters are still to be tested.
The results mean that in the Greater Toronto Area, for example, right now there is only one fully accredited Mandarin interpreter and one fully accredited Tamil language interpreter.
Selahedin Abubaker is one of the interpreters who failed. But he has been a court translator for more than 20 years, working on cases all over Ontario.
Abubaker says he is fluent in two languages spoken in Ethiopia, but as of this week the Ministry of the Attorney General says he's no longer qualified.
No complaints
Abubaker says that over the past two decades he has never had a complaint about his work from "the justices of the peace, the judges, the clients."
He says his exam was too academic and didn't take into account the nuances of the languages he interprets.
"The speed and the pause of our language" are extremely important, he said, "and that doesn't reflect what the test is all about."
Stella Rahman, president of the Court Interpreters Association of Ontario, says the organization offered to work with the ministry to upgrade skills or train interpreters, but the ministry refused.
Courtroom co-ordinators have told Rahman they now have strict instructions to use interpreters from the accredited list first, then those with conditional credentials.
Rahman worries that some of those on the list have little court experience.
"Although the interpreter has passed the test, he or she is not competent to handle high-profile cases like murder trials," she said. "But [the court co-ordinator's] hands are tied. He has to call on that interpreter."
Bev Dowd, a Spanish interpreter who passed her test, says the fallout may be felt in the Ontario legal system for years to come.
Chaos predicted
"Lawyers are saying, 'Maybe I'll go back and say that wasn't a good interpreter, the whole decision should be overturned.' So it's going to just create chaos," said Dowd.
Some lawyers say there aren't enough qualified interpreters.
Gary Anandasangaree, who represents many clients whose first language is Tamil, said the ministry's decision could put a barrier between "people who are effectively the accused and the system."
In a statement sent to CBC News, the ministry said it is recruiting new interpreters to help fill holes. And it defended the examinations.
"The new tests are specific to courts and are based on actual court documents and trial transcripts from Ontario court proceedings," the ministry said.
"This approach ensures the tests match a realistic court interpreter experience and reflect the high level of skill and specialized terminology required for court interpretation."
This story is now closed to commenting.
Read more:
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Article in Toronto Star - Bilingual Supreme Court is a matter of justice
Senator Claudette Tardif
Linguistic duality is an intrinsic part of our Canadian identity and values. Bill C-232 aims to amend the Supreme Court Act by adding an additional requirement in the selection of Supreme Court judges: that of understanding both official languages without the assistance of an interpreter.
Many political pundits have argued that we would sacrifice judicial competence by requiring linguistic abilities, and that we would reduce the pool of qualified candidates for the top positions at the highest court in Canada. However, I believe that these arguments are ill-founded and based on misinformation regarding the intent of the bill.
The purpose of this bill is to ensure justice and equality for all citizens who choose to have their case pleaded in the official language of their choice before the Supreme Court of Canada. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms already guarantees the right to use the official language of one’s choice in courts established by Parliament. The Official Languages Act further guarantees that parties may be heard and understood without the assistance of interpretation by all Federal Courts. There is, however, one exception: the Supreme Court.
It is critical for Supreme Court judges to fully understand the subtleties and nuances of counsel’s arguments. Based on his own personal experience at the Supreme Court, attorney Michel Doucet stated in a parliamentary committee studying this bill that “when you lose a case in a five to four decision, as happened to me at one point, and you’ve pleaded that case in French, . . . you wonder about what they understood. I listened to the English interpretation of my argument, and I understood none of it.”
I have great admiration for interpreters and translators, who have a very difficult job with stringent time constraints. However, at the Supreme Court of Canada, the highest court of the land where there is no possibility of appeal, interpretation introduces a margin of error and a counsel’s case could be damaged.
It is also important to note that the laws of Canada are written jointly in French and in English. No version has precedence on the other. No version is the translation of the other. A judge who understands both official languages will possess the required skills to understand the nuances of both the French and the English versions.
Some commentators have also argued that it would be difficult to acquire sufficient linguistic skills in both official languages to be able to understand legal arguments without interpretation. This argument fails to take into account Canada’s evolving reality. Canadian Parents for French estimate that there are currently 300,000 students enrolled in French immersion programs across the country. Some of our top law faculties are already teaching in both official languages.
As Professor Grégoire Webber of the London School of Economics noted: “understanding a case directly, unaided by interpretation, is part of the legal competency we expect of a judge.” The interpretation of law is not simply about knowing jurisprudence; it is about understanding what is said and what is meant. Similarly, being a judge is not a right. Judges are at the service of Canada and its population. It is not sufficient to rely entirely on an intermediary to understand arguments that will ultimately lead to a decision that is not appealable.
We expect the prime minister of Canada to be bilingual. Why then is it not expected that Supreme Court judges, at the very least, understand Canada’s two official languages without interpretation?
Canadian citizens not only have the right to be heard in the official language of their choice, they should also have the right to be understood
Senator Claudette Tardif (Alberta) is deputy leader of the opposition in the Senate and the sponsor in that chamber of Bill C-232, an Act to Amend the Supreme Court Act.
Link to this news:
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/columns/article/800138--bilingual-supreme-court-is-a-matter-of-justice#article
Linguistic duality is an intrinsic part of our Canadian identity and values. Bill C-232 aims to amend the Supreme Court Act by adding an additional requirement in the selection of Supreme Court judges: that of understanding both official languages without the assistance of an interpreter.
Many political pundits have argued that we would sacrifice judicial competence by requiring linguistic abilities, and that we would reduce the pool of qualified candidates for the top positions at the highest court in Canada. However, I believe that these arguments are ill-founded and based on misinformation regarding the intent of the bill.
The purpose of this bill is to ensure justice and equality for all citizens who choose to have their case pleaded in the official language of their choice before the Supreme Court of Canada. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms already guarantees the right to use the official language of one’s choice in courts established by Parliament. The Official Languages Act further guarantees that parties may be heard and understood without the assistance of interpretation by all Federal Courts. There is, however, one exception: the Supreme Court.
It is critical for Supreme Court judges to fully understand the subtleties and nuances of counsel’s arguments. Based on his own personal experience at the Supreme Court, attorney Michel Doucet stated in a parliamentary committee studying this bill that “when you lose a case in a five to four decision, as happened to me at one point, and you’ve pleaded that case in French, . . . you wonder about what they understood. I listened to the English interpretation of my argument, and I understood none of it.”
I have great admiration for interpreters and translators, who have a very difficult job with stringent time constraints. However, at the Supreme Court of Canada, the highest court of the land where there is no possibility of appeal, interpretation introduces a margin of error and a counsel’s case could be damaged.
It is also important to note that the laws of Canada are written jointly in French and in English. No version has precedence on the other. No version is the translation of the other. A judge who understands both official languages will possess the required skills to understand the nuances of both the French and the English versions.
Some commentators have also argued that it would be difficult to acquire sufficient linguistic skills in both official languages to be able to understand legal arguments without interpretation. This argument fails to take into account Canada’s evolving reality. Canadian Parents for French estimate that there are currently 300,000 students enrolled in French immersion programs across the country. Some of our top law faculties are already teaching in both official languages.
As Professor Grégoire Webber of the London School of Economics noted: “understanding a case directly, unaided by interpretation, is part of the legal competency we expect of a judge.” The interpretation of law is not simply about knowing jurisprudence; it is about understanding what is said and what is meant. Similarly, being a judge is not a right. Judges are at the service of Canada and its population. It is not sufficient to rely entirely on an intermediary to understand arguments that will ultimately lead to a decision that is not appealable.
We expect the prime minister of Canada to be bilingual. Why then is it not expected that Supreme Court judges, at the very least, understand Canada’s two official languages without interpretation?
Canadian citizens not only have the right to be heard in the official language of their choice, they should also have the right to be understood
Senator Claudette Tardif (Alberta) is deputy leader of the opposition in the Senate and the sponsor in that chamber of Bill C-232, an Act to Amend the Supreme Court Act.
Link to this news:
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/columns/article/800138--bilingual-supreme-court-is-a-matter-of-justice#article
Saturday, April 24, 2010
A TIME TO ACT!
Court Interpreters' Association of Ontario
Mailing address: 17 Wycombe Road, North York, ON. M3M 2W6 • Fax: (416) 398-2715
e-mail: stellarahman@hotmail.com • www.ontariocourtinterpreters.ca
A TIME TO ACT!
EMERGENCY COURT
INTERPRETERS MEETING
on the unjust re-testing and
results
When:
Saturday, April 24, 2010
9 A.M. to 12 Noon
Where:
Committee Room #1, 2nd Floor
New City Hall
100 Queen Street W., Toronto
Calling All Court Interpreters
(Freelance and Staff)
Mailing address: 17 Wycombe Road, North York, ON. M3M 2W6 • Fax: (416) 398-2715
e-mail: stellarahman@hotmail.com • www.ontariocourtinterpreters.ca
A TIME TO ACT!
EMERGENCY COURT
INTERPRETERS MEETING
on the unjust re-testing and
results
When:
Saturday, April 24, 2010
9 A.M. to 12 Noon
Where:
Committee Room #1, 2nd Floor
New City Hall
100 Queen Street W., Toronto
Calling All Court Interpreters
(Freelance and Staff)
Court Interpreters Association of Ontari- Petition
Court Interpreters' Association of Ontario
Mailing address: 17 Wycombe Road, North York, ON. M3M 2W6 • Fax: (416) 398-2715
e-mail: stellarahman@hotmail.com • www.ontariocourtinterpreters.ca
Petition
MAG Retesting
Immediate suspension of New Policy
The outcome and the classification model
The accredited court interpreters in the province of Ontario, as a collective body of professionals,
did not present any reasonable grounds of inadequacy to the Ministry of Attorney General to
necessitate re-examination of their linguistic capabilities. Similar to any other profession, individual
cases of misconduct and/or negligence should have been dealt with separately and can hardly be a
base to entice an overall judgment.
The Ministry refused the representation of the Court Interpreters’ Association of Ontario (CIAO),
the representative association of court interpreters, prior to testing. They further declined to indicate
the type of test, nor offer any preparation for the test, within a reasonable time. For many years,
they have also declined to provide interpreters with any training, essentially providing interpreters
with no professional support.
The recent results of re-testing and classification model are unacceptable for the following reasons:
• There has been no support or upgrading from the ministry for more than 15 years
• The pre-test material was provided one month before the re-test and that is totally unfair and
unreasonable
• The re-test does not reflect the real working situations of court interpreting
• The speed of the simultaneous interpretation section of the re-test was humanly impossible
• The results of the re-testing are therefore inaccurate and distorted
• Interpreters with years of experience may have failed the re-test, simply due to the
unrealistic features of the re-test and taking the re-test under tremendous pressure
• The classification model places interpreters in a degrading position within the court room,
therefore rendering it impossible to deliver quality professional service
All interpreters are placing a request to the Ministry for an immediate suspension of implementing
new policy and to review their decision based on the results of the re-test and the classification of
present and previously qualified court interpreters.
Mailing address: 17 Wycombe Road, North York, ON. M3M 2W6 • Fax: (416) 398-2715
e-mail: stellarahman@hotmail.com • www.ontariocourtinterpreters.ca
Petition
MAG Retesting
Immediate suspension of New Policy
The outcome and the classification model
The accredited court interpreters in the province of Ontario, as a collective body of professionals,
did not present any reasonable grounds of inadequacy to the Ministry of Attorney General to
necessitate re-examination of their linguistic capabilities. Similar to any other profession, individual
cases of misconduct and/or negligence should have been dealt with separately and can hardly be a
base to entice an overall judgment.
The Ministry refused the representation of the Court Interpreters’ Association of Ontario (CIAO),
the representative association of court interpreters, prior to testing. They further declined to indicate
the type of test, nor offer any preparation for the test, within a reasonable time. For many years,
they have also declined to provide interpreters with any training, essentially providing interpreters
with no professional support.
The recent results of re-testing and classification model are unacceptable for the following reasons:
• There has been no support or upgrading from the ministry for more than 15 years
• The pre-test material was provided one month before the re-test and that is totally unfair and
unreasonable
• The re-test does not reflect the real working situations of court interpreting
• The speed of the simultaneous interpretation section of the re-test was humanly impossible
• The results of the re-testing are therefore inaccurate and distorted
• Interpreters with years of experience may have failed the re-test, simply due to the
unrealistic features of the re-test and taking the re-test under tremendous pressure
• The classification model places interpreters in a degrading position within the court room,
therefore rendering it impossible to deliver quality professional service
All interpreters are placing a request to the Ministry for an immediate suspension of implementing
new policy and to review their decision based on the results of the re-test and the classification of
present and previously qualified court interpreters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
