Our intention was to cover not only interpreters and translators working at courts but all interpreters and translators working in a legal context, i.e. at police interviews, in court proceedings, asylum procedures, in lawyer-client consultations, in post-trial measures, etc. Moreover, in the course of the last decade the terms “legal interpreter” and “legal translator” have been used in various EU projects (e.g. Agis, Grotius) dealing with interpreters and translators working in these various settings and found their way into various DG JLS and EU Council documents such as the Green Paper or the proposed Framework Decision on procedural safeguards in criminal proceedings, or the Reflection Forum report on (legal) interpreter training commissioned by DG Interpretation. It therefore appeared quite logical to continue this practice with the EULITA project. Moreover, the practice in EU member states differs to such an extent – one uses e.g. sworn, court, certified, authorized, specialized interpreters/translators, to cite only those (also the FIT Committee uses “court interpreters and legal translator” in one and the same phrase) – that a single straightforward term referring to the comprehensive context of the legal settings seemed called for. We will provide a detailed definition of the concept of “legal interpreters and translators” on the EULITA website, so as to avoid any misunderstandings, especially among those translating or interpreting legal texts but not being translators and interpreters working in a judicial context. In time it will even be possible to adopt a definition of the concept which then, by amendment, can be incorporated in the EULITA Constitution, at the first General Assembly of EULITA, which will be held in a year’s time, if the EULITA members feel any need for it. Alternatively, it can simply be made part of the Internal Regulations.
- About us
- Join EULITA
- What's new
- Organisation
- LIT materials
- Conference
- Conference Programme
- Conference pictures
- EULITA launch
- Academic Programme
- Plenary Opening Session
- Country Profiles
- Accessing justice through an interpreter in Ireland’s District Courts
- Court interpreters and translators in Slovenia
- Court interpreters/translators in Germany
- Déontologie de la traduction et de l’interprétation en milieu judiciaire
- Exploring the concept of quality of LI in Sweden
- Interpreters in the legal process in Italy
- La formation des interprètes judiciaires en Pologne
- Le statut et l'utilisation de traducteurs et interprètes en justice en France
- Legal framework of the performance of court appointed interpreters
- Loi de la ville libre et hanseatique de Hambourg
- Recruitment and quality standards of LIT in Italy
- Some aspects of the community interpreting in Sweden
- The Dutch Law on Sworn Interpreters and Translators
- The main features of the Austrian Court Interpreters Act
- Two ways with one start and end
- Interpreters and the Police
- Interpreting in International Courts
- Terminology
- The International Scene
- Training
- Courses for Estonian court interpreters
- Ethical dilemmas of an interpreter trainer
- Le Master T3L de l’Université Paris 8
- Master 'Traduction et interprétation juridique'
- Master in IC and PSI & T
- Professionals and their interpreters in multilingual societies
- Testing interpreters
- Training interpreters and translators for courts and public authorities
- Training legal translators without legal training?
- Translation and Interpreting for the Courts
- Translation and Interpreting in Asylum Hearings
- Translation and Interpreting in Police Settings
- Translation in International Courts
- Videoconference and Remote Interpreting in Legal Proceedings
- Concluding Remarks
