The major issue in this case is the dismissal of the court-hired interpreter (hereafter referred to as proceedings interpreter) who was appointed to provide simultaneous interpretation of the court proceedings for Selalla. This became a point of contention on Selalla’s appeal following being convicted on all charges. It is unrecorded as to whether the retained interpreter (hereafter referred to …show more content…
The role of a proceedings interpreter is to interpret courtroom discourse involving the judges, prosecutors, witnesses and other courtroom members (McKeown & Miller, 2009). Only through the interpreter can the defendant bridge the language barrier and have involvement in the proceedings (Matu, Odhiambo, Adams, and Ongarora, 2012). The interpreter allows the defendant to be present and have presence in the courtroom by rendering him the ability to communicate with the judge and his attorney (Abel, 2012). Without simultaneous interpretation of the proceedings, the language barrier will sideline Selalla from his own court hearings, denying him from participating in the legal proceedings leading up to his