Cover not available

Article published In: Babel
Vol. 63:6 (2017) ► pp.813–834

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Language rights and interpreting services in Spanish prisons

 | John Jay College of Criminal Justice |
Published online: 21 June 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00015.mar
Abstract
Criminal justice systems throughout the world are becoming increasingly aware of the challenges posed by language barriers. However, that awareness is still limited to the realm of court proceedings, whereas legislation aiming to protect language rights of foreign prisoners is scarce and vague. In the particular case of Spain, only a few provisions in the Prison Rules envisage the notion of language assistance, making it explicit that such support is to be provided by other prisoners or staff.
This paper aims to analyze the implications of an underdeveloped language policy in the realm of Spanish penitentiary institutions, focusing on how the specific measures stemming from that policy affect the rights of imprisoned foreign nationals. Against the backdrop of the limited legislative coverage of language issues, communication strategies seem to be based on the linguistic assimilation of foreign language-speaking inmates, either to communicate directly with staff or to serve as interpreters for newly arrived fellow inmates. Causes and consequences of these strategies are discussed in this paper, including an analysis of the quality of the interpretations that nonprofessional prisoner-interpreters are able to provide.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Language rights of foreign prisoners
  • 3.Description of the study
    • 3.1Contextualization: The Spanish prison system and its foreign prison population
    • 3.2A three-tiered method to explore language barriers in Spanish prisons
  • 4.FNPs’ language rights in Spanish prisons: Results of the study
    • 4.1The legal framework
    • 4.2The situation on the ground: Language barriers and communication strategies
    • 4.3Prisoners as interpreters
      • 4.3.1General impressions
      • 4.3.2An analysis of quality of prisoners’ interpreting performance
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
References (48)
References
Alexander, Claire, Rosalind Edwards, and Bogusia Temple. 2004. Access to Services with Interpreters: User Views. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation/York Publishing Services.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Angelelli, Claudia. 2004. Revisiting the Interpreter’s Role. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Berdugo Gómez de la Torre, Ignacio, and Laura Zúñiga Rodríguez (eds). 2001. Manual de Derecho Penitenciario. Madrid: Colex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bhui, Hindpal Singh. 2009. “Foreign National Prisoners: Issues and Debates”. In Race and Criminal Justice, ed. by Hindpal Singh Bhui, 154–170. London: Sage. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blasco Mayor, M. Jesús, and Maribel del Pozo Triviño (eds). 2015. Legal Interpreting at a Turning Point. MonTI, Monographs in Translation and Interpreting, 7.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Campbell, Kathryn M. 2005. “Psychological Services”. In Encyclopedia of Prisons & Correctional Facilities, ed. by Mary Bosworth, 791–795. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Council of Europe. 2006. Recommendation Rec(2006)2 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the European Prison Rules. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)12 of the Committee of Ministers to member States concerning foreign prisoners. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Court Interpreters Act. 28 U.S. Code § 1827. 1978. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De la Cuesta Arzamendi, José Luis. 2005. “Retos Principales del Sistema Penitenciario Hoy”. In Jornadas en Homenaje al xv Aniversario de la Ley Orgánica General Penitenciaria, ed. by VV.AA, 119–137. Madrid: Ministerio del Interior – Secretaría General Técnica. DGIP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
del Valle, Sonia. 2003. Language Rights and the Law in the United States: Finding Our Voices. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DGIP [Dirección General de Instituciones Penitenciarias]. 2006. Plan marco de intervención educativa con internos extranjeros. Madrid: Ministerio del Interior. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ebden, Philip, Arvind Bhatt, Oliver J. Carey, and Brian Harrison. 1988. “The Bilingual Consultation”. The Lancet 331 (8581): 347. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elderkin-Thompson, Virginia, Roxanne Cohen Silver, and Howard Waitzkin. 2001. “When Nurses Double as Interpreters: A Study of Spanish-Speaking Patients in a U.S. Primary Care Setting”. Social Science and Medicine 521: 1343–1358. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
European Parliament and Council of the European Union. 2010. Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
García García, Julián. 2006. “Extranjeros en Prisión: Aspectos Normativos y de Intervención Penitenciaria”. Paper read at Congrés Penitenciari Internacional: La funció social de la política penitenciària, 2006, Barcelona.
Goffman, Erving. 1967. Interaction ritual. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harris, Brian, and Blanca Sherwood. 1978. “Translating as an Innate Skill”. In Language Interpretation and Communication, ed. by David Gerver and Wallace Sinaiko. New York: Plenum. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harris, Brian. 1977. “The Importance of Natural Translation”. Working Papers in Bilingualism 121: 96–114.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
HM Inspectorate of Prisons. 2006. Foreign National Prisoners: A Thematic Review. London: HM Inspectorate of Prisons.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. Foreign National Prisoners: A Follow-up Report. London: HM Inspectorate of Prisons.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Honigsberg, Peter Jan. 2013. Linguistic Isolation: A New Human Rights Violation Constituting Torture, and Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment (Law Research Paper No. 2013-11). San Francisco: University of San Francisco. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuo, David, and Mark J. Fagan. 1999. “Satisfaction with Methods of Spanish Interpretation in an Ambulatory Care Clinic”. Journal of General Internal Medicine 141: 547–550. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kurz, Ingrid. 2001. “Conference Interpreting: Quality in the Ears of the User”. Meta 46 (2): 394–409. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ley Orgánica 1/1979, de 26 de septiembre, General Penitenciaria. 1979. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martínez-Gómez, Aída. 2014. “Interpreting in Prison Settings: An International Overview”. Interpreting 16 (2): 233–259. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. “Interpreting Quality in Prison Settings: A Proposal for an Assessment Tool”. In Interpreting Quality: A Look around and Ahead, ed. by Cornelia Zwischenberger and Martina Behr. Berlin: Frank & Timme.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. “Facing Face: Non-Professional Interpreting in Prison Mental Health Interviews”. European Journal of Applied Linguistics 4 (1): 93–115. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meyer, Bernd. 2001. “How Untrained Interpreters Handle Medical Terms”. In Triadic Exchanges. Studies in Dialogue Interpreting, ed. by Ian Mason. Manchester: St Jerome Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ozolins, Uldis. 2010. “Factors that determine the provision of Public Service Interpreting: comparative perspectives on government motivation and language service implementation”. JoSTrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation 141: 194–215.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz, and Mira Kadric. 1999. “The Hospital Cleaner as Healthcare Interpreter: A Case Study”. The Translator 5 (2): 161–178. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz. 2001. “Quality Assessment in Conference and Community Interpreting”. Meta 46 (2): 410–425. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Real Decreto 190/1996, de 9 de febrero, por el que se aprueba el Reglamento Penitenciario. 1996. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rhodes, Penny, and Andrew Nocon. 2003. “A Problem of Communication? Diabetes Care among Bangladeshi People in Bradford”. Health and Social Care in the Community 11 (1): 45–54. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodríguez Sáez, José Antonio. 1992. “El Derecho de Defensa y de Asistencia Letrada en la Fase de Ejecución de las Penas Privativas de Libertad. Un Análisis del Deber Ser”. In Cárcel y Derechos Humanos: Un Enfoque Relativo a la Defensa de los Derechos Fundamentales de los Reclusos, ed. by Iñaki Rivera Beiras. Barcelona: José María Bosch Editor, S.A.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodríguez Yagüe, Cristina. 2004. “Los derechos de los extranjeros en las prisiones españolas: legalidad y realidad”. Revista General de Derecho Penal 21. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
SGIP [Secretaría General de Instituciones Penitenciarias]. 2014a. Informe General 2014. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014b. The Spanish prison system. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shlesinger, Miriam, Karla Déjean le Féal, Ingrid Kurz, Gabriele Mack, Lorella Cattaruzza, Anna-Lena Nilsson, Helge Niska, Franz Pöchhacker, and Maurizio Viezzi. 1997. “Quality in Simultaneous Interpreting”. In Conference Interpreting: Current Trends in Research, ed. by Yves Gambier, Daniel Gile, and Christopher Taylor, 123–132. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove. 2006. “Language Policy and Linguistic Human Rights”. In Introduction to Language Policy: Theory and Method, ed. by Thomas Ricento, 273–291. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Truss, Geoffrey, and Michelle Inderbitzin. 2005. “Inmate code”. In Encyclopedia of Prisons & Correctional Facilities, ed. by Mary Bosworth, 473–475. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
United Nations Organization. 1948. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1955. Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1985. Model agreement on the transfer of foreign prisoners and recommendations for the treatment of foreign prisoners. [URL]
Valdés, Guadalupe (ed.). 2003. Expanding Definitions of Giftedness: The Case of Young Interpreters from Immigrant Communities. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Kalmthout, Anton, Femke Hofstee-van der Meulen, and Frieder Dünkel (eds). 2007. Foreigners in European Prisons. The Netherlands: Wolf Legal Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VV.AA. 1996. Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wadensjö, Cecilia O. 1998. Interpreting as Interaction. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue