La Transposición al Derecho Nacional de la Directiva Europea 2010/64/UE en España, Francia, Bélgica y Luxemburgo: “Lost in transposition”
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37536/FITISPos-IJ.2015.2.0.40Keywords:
Transposición, Directiva, Traducción e Interpretación en los procesos penales, Registro, Calidad./Transposition, Directive, Translation and interpreting in criminal proceedings, Register, Quality of translation and interpreting in criminal proceedings.Abstract
Resumen: En el contexto de la globalización, el número de procesos penales multilingües en la Unión Europea ha aumentado. Para afrontar este reto, el 20 de octubre de 2010, el Parlamento Europeo aprobó la Directiva 2010/64/UE sobre el derecho a la interpretación y traducción en los proceso penales. Agotado el plazo de transcripción, en este estudio se analizan las medidas adoptadas en España, Bélgica, Francia y Luxemburgo, centrándose en la principal novedad introducida por la Directiva: la creación de un registro de traductores e interpretes independientes. Para extraer mejores conclusiones, se compara la situación en estos cuatro países con el caso de Austria, donde los requisitos para actuar como traductor e interprete judicial fueron establecidos antes de la publicación de la Directiva. El objetivo principal de este articulo es destacar casos de buenas y malas prácticas y proponer nuevas iniciativas que puedan contribuir a mejorar la calidad de la traducción e interpretación en los procesos penales.
Abstract: In a context of globalization, the number of multilingual criminal proceedings in the European Union is increasing. To deal with this challenge, on the 20th of October 2010, the European Parliament published the Directive 2010/64/UE on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings. Once the transposition deadline ended, the current study aims at analyzing the measures taken in Spain, Belgium, France and Luxemburg, focusing on the main innovation presented by the Directive: the creation of a register of independent translators and interpreters. For a better analysis, the situation in these four countries is compared to the case of Austria, where the requirements to act as judicial translator and interpreter had been established before the Directive. The main goal of the paper is to highlight cases of good and bad practices and to suggest new initiatives in order to improve the overall quality of translation and interpreting in criminal proceedings.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and guaranteeing the journal the right to be the first publication of the work as licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors can set separate additional agreements for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in the journal (eg, place it in an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
c. It allows and encourages authors to disseminate their work electronically (eg, in institutional repositories or on their own website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as to a subpoena more early and most of the published works (See The Effect of Open Access) (in English).