- About us
- Join EULITA
- What's new
- Organisation
- LIT materials
- Conference
- Conference Programme
- 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
Nuremberg in Madrid: provision of interpreting services during the Madrid train bomb trial
Anne Martin, University of Granada, Spain
Juan Miguel Ortega Herráez, University of Alicante, Spain – GRETI Research Group
The high profile trials of the 2004 Madrid train bomb attacks mark a watershed in the history and development of court interpreting in Spain. Traditionally, court interpreting arrangements in Spain have been less than adequate, with few enforceable requirements regarding training and accreditation of those involved. However, during the train bomb trials simultaneous interpreting was used for the first time in a Spanish courtroom (outside the Basque country) and utmost care was taken to ensure that the interpreters working at this mega-trial were experienced, trained professionals with knowledge of the different dialectal variations of Arabic spoken by the defendants and witnesses.
Moreover, translation became a major issue at the trial as the principal defendant was acquitted in part due to the deficient translation of a conversation originally in Arabic and which constituted the main evidence leading to the charges brought against him.
In this paper we will analyse the structure and organization of the interpreting services that were put into place for this trial, both in the courtroom and behind the scenes, exploring the possible reasons why such care was taken to ensure a quality service and what the possible effects may be for court interpreting in Spain in the future. We will also discuss the role assumed by the interpreters and the role ascribed to them by the legal professionals who depended on them. The results of the wide visibility given to the interpreting process through mass media coverage will also be referred to.
File:
