Activities of Carmen ROMERO LÓPEZ related to 2010/0801(COD)
Plenary speeches (2)
Rights to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings (debate)
Rights to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings (debate)
Amendments (25)
Amendment 40 #
Draft directive
Recital -1 (new)
Recital -1 (new)
(-1) Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union enshrines the right to a fair trial, including the right to assistance and legal representation. Article 48 thereof guarantees respect for the presumption of innocence and the rights of defence.
Amendment 43 #
Draft directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) On 30 November 2009, the Council adopted the Roadmap on Procedural Rights which requested the Commission to put forward proposals on a "step by step" basis, on the right to interpretation and translation, the right to information about rights, the right to legal advice, before trial and at trial, the right for a detained person to communicate with family members, employers and consular authorities, and protection for vulnerable suspects.
Amendment 45 #
Draft directive
Recital 7 b (new)
Recital 7 b (new)
(7b) This Directive, the first measure on the Roadmap, should lay down common standards to be applied in the fields of interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings in order to enhance the necessary confidence among Member States.
Amendment 49 #
Draft directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The rights provided for in this Directive should also apply to proceedings for, as necessary accompanying measures, to the execution of a European Arrest Warrant within the limits provided for by this Directive. Executing Members States should provide, and bear the costs of, interpretation and translation for the benefit of the requested person who does not understand or speak the language of the proceedings.
Amendment 50 #
Draft directive
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) The suspected or accused person should be able, inter alia, to explain his version of the events to his legal counsel, point out any statements with which he disagrees and make his legal counsel aware of any facts that should be put forward in his defence.
Amendment 51 #
Draft directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) The finding that there is no need for interpretation or translation should be subject to the possibility of review, in accordance with national law. Such review may be carried out, for example, throughappeal. Member States should ensure that the suspect or accused person has the right to challenge a spdecific complaint procedure, or in the context of an ordinary appeal procedure against decisions on the meritssion finding that there is no need for interpretation including cases where interpretation or translation is so deficient that it amounts to an absence of interpretation.
Amendment 55 #
Draft directive
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) To ensure the effectiveness and quality of interpretation and translation, Member States should make sure that judges, prosecutors, lawyers, police and relevant court personnel are offered the necessary training to enable them to assess the suspect's linguistic needs and see to it that the necessary resources are brought to bear to ensure that the suspected or accused person is able to understand the proceedings, and to evaluate the quality of interpretation and translation.
Amendment 57 #
Draft directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) SThe safeguarding of the fairness of the proceedings requires that essential documents, or at least the important passages of such documents, be translated for the benefit of the suspected or accused person. It is up to the authorities of the Member States to dedocuments that are essential in order to ensure that the suspect is able to understand the case against him and exercidse which documens rights should be translated, in accordance with national law. Some documents should always be considered essential documents that should be translated, such as the decision. The following should be considered essential: the charge or indictment, the detention order depriving athe person of his liberty, the charge or indictment and any judgessential documentary evidence and judgments. In the event of deprivation of liberty, standards applying to conditions of detention, where such documents exist, should also be considered essential documents.
Amendment 58 #
Draft directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) A waiver of the right to written translation of documents should be unequivocal, and set out in writh minimum safeguardsing once legal advice has been taken, and should not run counter to any important public interest.
Amendment 59 #
Draft directive
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) Member States should strive for a high level of qualification for interpreters and translators employed in criminal proceedings, including for those assisting suspected or accused persons with a physical or mental impairment, in order to ensure an adequate standard of interpretation and translation and guarantee the fairness of proceedings. In addition to general language skills, these translators and interpreters should have specialist knowledge of legal terminology. The qualification of interpreters and translators employed in criminal proceedings should be verified by a formal degree or any similar proof of proficiency in the language concerned and attested through accreditation or certification.
Amendment 60 #
Draft directive
Recital 16 b (new)
Recital 16 b (new)
(16b) Member States should ensure that there is a national register, or registers, of qualified interpreters and translators to be employed in criminal proceedings. The register or registers should be kept up to date so as to reflect, inter alia, the status of the interpreter's or translator’s qualifications, without prejudice to the application of rules on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data. Member States are encouraged to make their national registers accessible to competent authorities of other Member States. In this context, particular attention should be paid to the aim of facilitating the interconnection of databases for legal translators and interpreters, as envisaged in the European e-Justice action plan of 27 November 2008.
Amendment 67 #
Draft directive
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
Amendment 71 #
Draft directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that a suspected or accused person who does not understand or speak the language of the criminal proceedings concerned is provided without delay with interpretation in his/her mother tongue ornecessary in order to ensure he ins another language that he/she understands, in order to safeguard his/her rights to fair proceedings. Interpretation, including of communication between the suspected or accused person and his/her legal counsel, shall be provided during criminal proceedings before investigative and judicial authorities, including during police questioning, during all cble to understand the case against him and exercise his rights and to safeguard the fairness of the proceedings. Interpretation, including of communication between the suspect and his lawyer and covering legal advice received, shall be provided throughourt hearings and during any necessary interim hearings, and maythose proceedings. It shall also be provided in other situations. This provision does not affect rules of national law concerning the presence of a legal counsel during any stage of the criminal proceedings case of detention for official contacts between the detaining authorities and the suspect.
Amendment 74 #
Draft directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that a suspected or accused person who does not understand or speak the language of the criminal proceedings concerned is provided with interpretation into his native language or into another language that he understands, in order to safeguard his right to fair proceedings. Interpretation, including of communications between the suspected or accused person and his legal counsel,out delay with high-quality interpretation that will ensure that the suspect is able to understand the case against him and exercise his rights and will safeguard the fairness of the proceedings. Interpretation shall be provided during criminalthroughout the proceedings before investigative and judicial authorities, including during police questioning, during all court hearings and during any necessary interim hearings, and may be provided inecessary meetings between other situations. This provision does not affect rules of national law concerning the presence of a legal counsel during any stage of the criminal proceeduspect and his lawyer, during all court hearings and during all necessary interim hearings.
Amendment 75 #
Draft directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that a person with a hearing impediment receives interpretation assistance, if appropriate for that personThe right to interpretation shall include linguistic assistance for persons with hearing or speech impediments.
Amendment 77 #
Draft directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that at someany stage in the proceedings, in accordance with national law, there is the possibility of a review of a finding that there is no need for interpretation. Such review does not entail the obligation for Member States to provide for a separate mechanism in which the sole ground for review is the challenging of such finding. at which interpretation is required there is, in accordance with national law, a right to appeal against any decision to refuse interpretation. Procedures for complaints about the quality of interpretation which provide an opportunity to secure a replacement interpreter shall also be established.
Amendment 79 #
Draft directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that any suspected or accused person who does not understand the language of the criminal proceedings concerned is provided with a translation, into his native language or into another language that he understands, of all documents which are essential in order to safeguard his right to fair proceedings, or at least the important passages of such documents, provided that the person concerned has the right of accpromptly with written translations of all essential documents that are of sufficient quality to ensure that the suspect is able to understand the accusations and to safeguard the fairness tof the documents concerned under national lawcriminal proceedings.
Amendment 82 #
Draft directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The competent authorities shall decide which are the essential documents to be translated under paragraph 1. The essential docuessential documents to be translated shall include the charge or indictments, to be translated, in whole or the important passages thereof, shall include at least detention orders or equivalent decisions depriving the pershe detention order depriving the person of his liberty, essential documentary evidence and judgments. In the event of deprivation of his liberty, the charge or indictment and any judgment, where such documents existstandards applying to conditions of detention, where such documents exist, shall also be considered essential documents.
Amendment 83 #
Draft directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that at someany stage in the proceedings, in accordance with national law, there is the possibility of a review if at which translation is required there is, in accordance with national law, a right to appeal against any decision to refuse translation of a documents referred to in paragraphs 2, 3 and 3 is not provided. Such review does not entail the obligation for Member States to provide for a separate mechanism in which the sole ground for review is the challenging of such finding4 and to challenge the quality of a translation without delay.
Amendment 86 #
Draft directive
Article 3 – paragraph 6
Article 3 – paragraph 6
6. Provided that this does not affect the fairness of theBy way of derogation in exceptional circumstances and subject to the appeal proceedingsure in Article 3(4), an oral translation or an oral summary of the documentswritten material referred to in this Article may, where appropriate, be provided instead of a written translation. In such cases the Member States shall ensure that the oral translation is provided in the presence of the lawyer and does not affect the fairness of the proceedings and that a full and permanent record is kept of such oral translation or summary.
Amendment 87 #
Draft directive
Article 3 – paragraph 7
Article 3 – paragraph 7
7. A person who has a right undon whom this Article confers this Article toe right to receive translations of documents may, at any time, waive waive that right, in writing, after receiving legal assistance on this righpoint.
Amendment 88 #
Draft directive
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5a Audio and video recording In exceptional cases in which there is no written translation in accordance with Article 3(6), Member States shall ensure that an audio and video recording is made. In the event of a dispute, that recording shall be provided to any party requesting it.
Amendment 89 #
Draft directive
Article 6
Article 6
Nothing in this Directive shall be construed as limiting or derogating from any of the rights and procedural safeguards that may be ensured under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, under other relevant provisions of international law or under the laws of any Member States which provide a higher level of protection.
Amendment 91 #
Draft directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Amendment 92 #
Draft directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
When Member States adopt those measures, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. The methods of making such reference shall be laid down by the Member States.