A compromise of rights, rights of language and rights to a language in Eugene Terreblanche’s (ET) trial within a trial: evidence lost in translation

Abstract

The trial (within a trial) of Eugene Terre'Blanche (hereon referred to as the ET Trial) in a high court, which took place in Ventersdorp in January and February 2010 sparked intense interest in South Africa and abroad, and raised critical questions about issues of (i) language rights, (ii) communicative competence of law enforcement agencies, particularly the police, and (iii) the asymmetries in the police interaction with the accused persons. Apart from communicating the rights of the accused persons in a language that s/he understands, the police officers are entrusted with additional responsibilities which include, among others, being a channel or conduit that encodes and decodes information within milliseconds in an attempt to reconstruct an accused person's narrative into formal evidence for purposes of court proceedings. This reality is further substantiated by Komter (2002/2003:202) who suggests that, "[...] police officers should record the fact that they informed the suspect about his right to silence and [...] that they record the suspect's statement as much as possible in his own words". Against this backdrop, it is also worth stating that the South African multilingual setting is confronted by serious complexities, especially in cases where the accused is a speaker of an African language who can only rely on interpreting/translation services in order to follow the legal discourse, whereas languages of record are still solely in English and Afrikaans. Based on an examination and analysis of the judgement of the ET trial within a trial, this study finds that, despite the dawn of democracy, the South African Criminal Justice System is still confronted by linguistic and cultural challenges. Central to these challenges is the potential for miscarriages of justice. Furthermore, the main principles of Critical Sociolinguistic Analysis (CSA) employed in this study have uncovered the fact that power imbalances in the criminal justice system do not necessarily originate through legislation but through situated processes and practices (Eades 2010). As Fairclough appropriately argues, there is a need not just to examine the power in the discourse but also the power behind the discourse (1989).

Embracing African languages as indispensable resources through the promotion of multilingualism

“…In this regard, Alexander (2007) argues that a policy which promotes multilingualism in work environments ensures an increase in the efficiency and possesses multiple cost-effective rewards over a policy that promotes monolingualism. Within the criminal justice profession in particular, scholars have argued that linguistic and cultural barriers present a genuine threat to the effective dispensation of justice in courts (Choshi, 2009;Hlophe, 2003;Ralarala, 2012). This is worsened by the fact that, despite the constitutional recognition of eleven official language, the languages of record in the court system remain solely English and Afrikaans.…”

“…This is worsened by the fact that, despite the constitutional recognition of eleven official language, the languages of record in the court system remain solely English and Afrikaans. According to Ralarala (2012), South Africa's multilingual setting has serious complexities, especially in cases where the accused speaks an African language and can only rely on interpreting or translation services in order to follow the legal discourse. Ralarala (2012) further asserts that, while language barriers are not unique to South Africa, the South African situation is made unusual by the human costs resulting from this challenge in real-life situations and the sentencing of people to imprisonment, sometimes for uncommitted crimes.…”

An analysis of critical ‘voices’ and ‘styles’ in transpreters’ translations of complainants’ narratives

“…Two, if the matter eventually goes to trial, the case could well be regarded as one of those cases formulated on the basis of ' Alleged verbals, ' in which the witness would disown the charge when the matter goes to court on the basis that the police record was prefabricated (see Eades 1997 for a detailed account). A case in point is S v Kimbani dealt with in some detail in Ralarala (2013). In this case, the police statement was allegedly distorted and obtained through coercion and, as a result, the actual translated statement contradicted the original statement presented by the witness in isiXhosa.…”

‘Tell me the story is and do not leave out anything’. Social responsibility and ethical practices in the translation of complainants’ narratives: the potential for change

“…This apparently seamless, unremarked-upon intra-and inter-lingual translation routinely performed by these officers has led to the coining of the term transpreter, to highlight the communicative, linguistic and discursive competencies demanded of officers in this frontline work with the public (Ralarala 2012). The English and literacy proficiencies of these officers is, in some cases, exceedingly low, which makes them ill-equipped to meet these demands.…”