Advertisement
First, it is about fairness.
Imagine if you were accused of a crime in a country where you did not speak the language — how would you answer the charges? You can’t hold people accountable for their actions, if they don’t understand what’s going on.
Or, suppose you were robbed while you were on vacation, and the authorities told you, “Sorry, if you need help, you will have to learn Norwegian.”
Much of the interpreter cost for the courts goes to helping crime victims and witnesses tell their stories. The U.S. Supreme Court committee that reported on this issue in 1993 said that interpreters were “fundamental” to due process of law.
Secondly, how do we want to deal with people from other countries who work and raise their families here? My great-grandmother only spoke German. If she ever had to go to court — which could have happened since during Prohibition she made wine for everyone on her block — she would have needed an interpreter.
She didn’t learn English. But her kids did, and they became teachers and farmers and business people, contributing a whole lot to the small town where they lived.
In the long run, the cost of court interpreters is very small compared to the value of a strong, diverse community where each person can participate.
Stuart is a Minnesota State Public Defender.
|
More Letters: |
