Welcome to the Judicial Council of California Court Interpreters Program Ethics Refresher Training, Module Three, Impartiality and Avoidance of Conflict of Interest. In this module, you will better understand the importance of maintaining neutrality, what constitutes a conflict of interest, and how to avoid perceptions of bias. We will also go through various scenarios related to impartiality and avoiding conflicts of interest in court. In adhering to the ethical standards laid out in the Professional Standards and Ethics for California Court Interpreters, court interpreters must remain neutral officers of the court and limit their interactions to not create perceptions of bias. Related to this standard, California Rules of Court, Rule 2.890C states, a or an interpreter must be impartial and unbiased and must refrain from conduct that may give an appearance of bias. It further states, a, an interpreter, must disclose to the judge and to all parties any actual or apparent conflict of interest. As a court interpreter, your role is to act as the neutral communication bridge between the limited English proficient, or LEP, or deaf and hard of hearing court user and English speakers. In this role, you must report any actual or potential conflict of interests before taking an assignment. You must also report any issues if a conflict of interest arises during an assignment. This includes actual conflicts of interest, as well as anything that could be perceived as a conflict of interest by someone else, even if you're sure that you would not be biased in any way. You must also maintain impartiality and avoid any and all favoritism while interpreting. Any real or perceived bias could jeopardize your role, the case you're interpreting in, and the court user you're interpreting for. It could also negatively affect your reputation and the reputation of other court interpreters. Let's look more closely at conflicts of interest for interpreters. What is a conflict of interest in the context of court interpreting? A conflict of interest exists any time you have a personal interest in the outcome of a case. A conflict of interest, real or perceived, also exists if you are a friend or relative of anyone involved in the case. This applies to close, direct friends and relatives, as well as casual acquaintances. Even if you don't personally know someone very well, others could perceive your relationship as closer than it is, and feel that you will not be able to remain neutral while interpreting. Let's look at some examples. First, let's say that you are interpreting for a plaintiff in a small claims case who is suing a small business in the area. This business hires your spouse regularly for maintenance work. You know that if the business loses the case, they are likely to have to shut down or at least stop hiring your spouse for odd jobs. Is this a conflict of interest? Next, let's say that you are called to interpret for a witness who you don't personally know, but whose sister you used to babysit for. In fact, the witness was never present during any of your babysitting assignments. Is this a conflict of interest? The answer in both circumstances is that whether there is an actual conflict of interest or not, either situation could result in you being perceived as biased. Therefore, it is best to notify the court as soon as you realize there may be a potential conflict. Another situation that can lead to the appearance of a conflict of interest is prior involvement in the case. For example, you may have interpreted for a petitioner in a divorce case at the self-help center. Months later, the court hires you to interpret for a family law trial. As soon as you arrive in the courtroom, you realize you will be interpreting for the respondent in that divorce case. What do you do? Like the previous examples, you should report your prior involvement to the court so that you are not perceived as biased toward either party. When reporting a conflict of interest, you have the duty to report it to the court as soon as you become aware of it. If possible, try to identify and disclose any conflicts before your assignment. This way, the court can have ample time to consider the conflict and decide what to do. For example, you may review a witness list beforehand to make sure you don't know any of the parties. If you do recognize a potential conflict of interest before the assignment, you can discuss it with the interpreter coordinator. But if you don't learn of the potential conflict until you're in court, alert the judge as soon as you can. For example, you might say, your honor, the interpreter may have a potential conflict of interest. Would your honor like the interpreter to explain or approach the bench? The judge can then consider the potential conflict right then and determine if another interpreter should be appointed. There may also be times when you are appointed to a case in which you have a clear conflict of interest, such as a personal relationship with the parties. Or you may have had life experiences that would make it difficult or impossible to remain neutral as the interpreter. In these cases, you must notify the court as soon as you realize you have a conflict and offer to recuse yourself. This may be especially hard if you know there are very few interpreters that may be able to interpret in your language pair. It may also be difficult if you're a contract interpreter and may lose the assignment. However, you still need to let the court know if any issues exist and let them decide how to handle it. Remember, being disqualified or replaced due to a real or perceived conflict of interest does not reflect in your abilities as an interpreter. Being upfront with the court is the responsible and ethical thing to do and allows you to stay within your role as a neutral officer of the court. Reporting a conflict of interest demonstrates a commitment to professionalism, impartiality, credibility, and integrity. Failure to do so may lead to a damaged reputation or even legal consequences. As an interpreter, it is also your duty to avoid or at least minimize any perceptions of bias to avoid compromising your role. You should avoid engaging with anyone you are interpreting for in any way that could give the appearance that you are partial to them or on their side. This means avoiding any casual or personal conversations or interactions with the party you are interpreting for, even if this feels unfriendly. The same is true for engaging in conversations out of court with the opposing party. Doing that may make the party you are interpreting for distrust your interpretation or doubt your impartiality, which can also jeopardize the party's trust and confidence in the overall court process. To avoid putting yourself in a position that could create a perception of bias or place you in a position where you would be acting outside of your role as a court interpreter, you should always maintain a professional distance between yourself and the party or witness for whom you are interpreting. For example, if the party you are interpreting for leaves through one door, use another door if you can. If they go to the restroom, wait until they leave before using it. During recesses, go for a walk instead of lingering in the courthouse. Of course, this does not mean being rude or unprofessional. If approached by a party with questions, you can politely hold up your hand and, if you haven't done so already, explain that you are the court interpreter and are there to interpret for them and cannot answer their questions. As noted previously, if the party has an attorney, direct them to their attorney for questions or information. If they are self-represented, direct them to court staff or the self-help center. Depending on their question, you can simply deflect by stating, I don't know, even if you do, or saying, I'm not qualified to answer that, but go to the clerk's office or self-help center and they may be able to help you. Then politely excuse yourself. The appearance of bias could also be created if an attorney seeks you out in the courthouse to employ you privately. Networking is an important part of any profession, including interpreting, but it is important to be aware of the potential for the appearance of bias if you network within the courthouse. Remember, there are other opportunities to build professional networks with colleagues and potential clients. These include attending conferences, workshops, and other professional development opportunities, volunteering for interpreting organizations or nonprofits, and creating referral networks with other interpreters. In many cases, you may be the only other person that speaks the language of the LEP or Deaf or Hard of Hearing party needing an interpreter. You are also likely the first person knowledgeable of the court system that they've encountered who can communicate with them. This is particularly common with self-represented litigants who don't have a lawyer who can answer questions or explain the court process and steps to them. This situation may result in the party asking you questions directly or to seeking explanations or guidance from you. Keep in mind that responding directly to the party with even very basic information could present a perception of bias if others don't know what you are saying. It could be seen as giving advice or helping the party out. If the party you are interpreting for needs information, it is best to interpret their needs out loud to the judge or attorney who can then respond. If the interaction happens in a location outside of the courtroom, such as in a hallway or waiting area, you could refer the person to the self-help center or to court staff for more information. Depending on your availability and your court's policies, you can offer to interpret for that court user at their destination, but do not engage them and their questions in the meantime. If you are uncomfortable, you can remind them of your role that you are not a lawyer and that you would not want to risk giving them incorrect information. Simply direct them, accompany them if allowed, and wait until you reach the court clerk or other staff to engage any further. Remember, LEP and deaf and hard of hearing parties may not know much about your role as an interpreter and they may see you as the only person they can really communicate with. You can help make your role clearer by having a pre-appearance interview so you can introduce yourself, explain your role as the interpreter, and make sure that there are no barriers to communication, such as a regional dialect that you may not be able to understand. Ideally, this session would also happen in front of a judge, attorney, or court staff, such as the court interpreter coordinator. Be sure to refer to module one for more information on how to conduct a pre-appearance interview. As just noted, an LEP or deaf or hard of hearing court user may ask you questions since you may be the only other person who can speak their language. While you want to be careful about engaging in conversations without a judge or attorney present, there is some latitude when answering basic questions. For example, if an LEP party approaches you in the hall and asks for directions to a courtroom or for hours of operation, you can provide this direct and basic information in their language. Just be sure your response is accurate and to the point. You do not want an interaction to turn into a long conversation that could give an appearance of bias. You also do not want to give any information, basic or not, that you are not sure about. You also want to avoid crossing into territory that would be considered giving legal advice. For example, let's say an LEP litigant that you just interpreted for asks you, how long do I have to comply with this order? You could very simply repeat exactly what the judge said if that issue was in fact addressed and you remember what was said accurately. However, even answering this basic question opens you up to the risk of a follow-up question like, what happens if I don't complete the class in time? Suddenly, you are in legal advice territory. Responding to these inquiries can also introduce other challenges. For example, let's say a litigant asks you how long the judge said the restraining order is good for. Even if you carefully word your answer to provide neutral information, there may be nuances to the question that could get lost and have serious repercussions. In this example, responding that the restraining order that the judge issued is good for five years could leave out an important piece of information, that the restraining order is good for five years, but the child custody order remains in place until it is changed by a court order. Ultimately, you do not want to be in a situation where your answer is misunderstood, misrepresented, misconstrued as advice, or just wrong. For a self-represented party, keep in mind you can always refer them to the court's self-help center for answers, or direct them to the court's self-help website, or even the Judicial Council's online self-help center for more information and resources for legal help. Let's turn to some additional challenges related to impartiality and perceptions of bias. For example, what if you were asked by another officer of the court to contact or speak directly to the LEP or Deaf or Hard of Hearing party? To illustrate, let's say an attorney needs to reschedule a deposition. He asks you if you could contact the litigant and explain to them, in their language, about the time change. What do you do? The short answer is that you should always avoid having one-on-one conversations with the party you are interpreting for. Again, what may appear to be a simple request can quickly develop into a conversation about how the case is going or about legal issues in the case. You do not want to be in a situation where you are alone on the phone or in person with the litigant and they ask for advice or have questions that would require answers beyond the scope of your role. Moreover, you don't want to give a perception of bias. Even if said in confidence, it may be brought up later. In response to this request, you can explain to the attorney that contacting the party directly is outside of your role as an interpreter. Instead, you can offer to assist by being on the line and interpreting information to the party. But what if this type of assistance comes at the request of a judge? For instance, you may be interpreting for a self-represented litigant and after the litigant receives their court order, the judge dismisses you both, asking you to go outside the courtroom and explain the order to the litigant. What should you do? These types of requests are not unusual. In busy calendars, the judges don't have time to answer a party's questions about what an order means, so be prepared. If a judge asks you to explain an order, or explain a term, or answer questions from a litigant, politely alert the judge that it would be inappropriate for you to do so and offer to do what would be in your role as the interpreter. In the case of a court order or questions, for example, you can say, Your Honor, given the interpreter's role and ethical obligations, she is unable to explain the order or answer the party's questions directly, but the interpreter would be happy to sight-translate the order to the party if you would be willing to explain. Another thing that could give an appearance of bias is accepting gifts or gratuities. For this reason, you should never accept gifts, gratuities, favors, or any forms of payment of any kind from a party for which you have interpreted. This also includes not accepting any forms of payment or gratuities from family members or friends of the party you are interpreting for, even if something is offered outside of the court or at some future time. For example, if sometime after the interpreting assignment, you find yourself at a restaurant owned by family or friends of the party you interpreted for, and you're offered a free or discounted meal, you should politely decline. Again, you can cite the Code of Ethics while declining a gift. For example, I very much appreciate the sentiment, but I'm so sorry. My ethical duties prevent me from being able to accept any gifts. This is the same ethical duty for all court employees to ensure a positive reputation for the courts. Exemplary conduct by all officers of the court inspires public trust in the courts and is essential for maintaining a fair and independent court system for all. So far, we have discussed disclosing conflicts of interest and refraining from behavior that could be perceived as biased in favor of or against a party. But what happens if you develop actual feelings and opinions about a case or the parties? While it may be hard at times, as an interpreter, you must maintain your neutral role as an officer of the court. You should not share any judgments, thoughts, or feelings you may have about a case or about a party you have interpreted for. This means not talking about your thoughts or personal opinions with anyone, including attorneys, witnesses, plaintiffs, defendants, family members of the party receiving the interpretation, or even interpreter colleagues. Private thoughts or opinions, once shared, are not likely to remain private. Avoid it even when you are asked for your opinion. For example, an attorney may ask you whether you think his client you are interpreting for is telling the truth. If put in this position by anyone, you can politely explain your role as to be a linguistic conduit and nothing more. Any comments you make run the risk of being misunderstood, distorted, taken out of context, or becoming public. Further, cases may still be subject to further proceedings or appeal, and inadvertently disclosing confidential or other sensitive information could result in major consequences for the parties involved, or even yourself as the interpreter. You should always make sure to not let any thoughts you may have about the case or party impact your neutral interpretation. Additionally, you should not advocate for the party you are interpreting for. This can be especially difficult when working with self-represented litigants who may be struggling to understand or navigate the court process, or who share a strong cultural connection with you. It may often seem harmless to offer that extra help, knowing you are remaining neutral. But don't forget that, to others, it may appear like favoritism, and your duty is to avoid any perception of impropriety and always maintain neutrality. In addition to not speaking to other parties, attorneys, or fellow interpreters about a case, you should also avoid speaking to the public or news media about cases you have interpreted for. Even if portions of the case are public, some matters are closed, and attorney-client privileged communication is always confidential. Additionally, cases may still be pending, or appeals can be filed. If press or members of the public approach you about a case, avoid answering their inquiries. Refer them to the attorneys handling the case or to court administration. If approached by the press, cite the standards and ethics related to impartiality and the rules of court. Let the reporter know you are not allowed to comment or express your personal opinions on cases you interpret for, nor make any public comment about cases you have been involved in. If a reporter asks for information about interpreting techniques and tries to engage you through that lens, refer them to an interpreter colleague who is not part of the case. Lastly, let's turn our focus to online behavior. In this technological age, it is common for information, and even misinformation, to spread rapidly. For this reason, you should never share any thoughts, opinions, or details about a case that you have interpreted for on any online platforms. This includes sending information by email, posting to social media, chatting in online forums, and more, even if you are sure it is anonymous. Not only do you run the risk of inadvertently sharing confidential information, but it may also cast an image of bias and unprofessionalism on your part and potentially other court interpreters and the judicial system at large. Now that we have reviewed impartiality and avoidance of conflicts of interest, it's time to practice what you've learned. Let's take a look at a few scenarios and see how you would handle them. You have been assigned to interpret for a defendant in an assault and battery case. While you do not know the defendant, you just found out that one of the prosecution's witnesses is someone who goes to your small community church. What, if anything, should you do? Disclose the information and let the court decide. Always aim for early disclosure on potential conflicts of interest, and do it before you get to court, if possible, or as soon as you learn of the potential conflict during your assignment. If you receive the witness list ahead of time and notice the potential conflict, inform the court interpreter coordinator and let them make the call. You're walking toward your next assignment in one of the courtrooms when you're approached by an LEP litigant who recognizes you from seeing you interpret in the courtroom. He starts telling you he showed up a few minutes late to court and his case wasn't called, and he doesn't know what happened. He asks you to help him figure out what happened and what he can do. How should you handle this? Direct him to the courtroom to ask the courtroom clerk about his matter. If you have time and are willing, you can accompany him into the courtroom, without engaging him while walking there, and help interpret for him with the courtroom clerk. If that's not feasible, direct him to the self-help center or the clerk's office to ask for help. The court's child custody mediator asks if you can relay a quick telephone message to one of the self-represented parties in mediation to reschedule the court-ordered mediation. She explains it would save her a lot of time if you could say it directly in the party's language. What, if anything, do you do? Explain to the court mediator that the interpreter's role is to interpret only, and that you must have someone else on the line with you to relay the messages to the party, and be prepared to answer the party's questions, if any. You're contacted by a reporter who asks to interview you about interpreting in general. Seeing no issue, since specific cases won't be discussed, you agree. While speaking to the reporter, however, they mention that they watched you interpret a high-profile public hearing weeks earlier, and that they have questions about the interpretation. What, if anything, do you do? Ask the reporter to the attorneys in the case. If the reporter insists that she just wants to discuss terminology, not the case, consider referring her to an interpreter colleague who is not involved in your case. You are called in by the prosecution to interpret for a state witness who is being prepped for testimony. Several weeks later, you are called by the court to interpret for the defendant in the case where the same witness is testifying. What, if anything, do you do? Disclose the conflict of interest to the court. After a long day of interpreting for a litigant, his mother, who is sitting in the audience, comes to thank you for your assistance. She presents you with a box of homemade sweets, each one delicately wrapped. She explains she made them from scratch especially for you. What, if anything, do you do? Politely decline the gift and explain that it is against your code of ethics to accept them. Interpreters are prohibited from accepting any form of gift or gratuity. We hope this module helped refresh your understanding of interpreter impartiality and avoidance of conflicts of interest. For more information, refer to the resource sheet that accompanies these modules.

impartiality

conflicts of interest

court interpreters

professionalism

judicial proceedings

ethics