Constitutional Guarantee of the Right to Interpretation in Criminal Justice Procedures

This paper explores the critical role of judiciary interpreting in legal proceedings, focusing on the necessity for accurate and effective court interpretation for defendants who do not speak the court's language. Judiciary interpreting is distinct from general interpreting because it directly impacts the protection of basic rights and the fairness of the trial. Without proper interpretation, defendants may not fully understand the charges against them or the legal procedures, leading to the potential infringement of their defense rights and the integrity of the trial. As South Korea transitions into a multicultural society, the influx of immigrants has led to an increase in criminal cases involving non-native Korean speakers. These defendants often face difficulties in both testimony and communication with legal professionals due to language barriers. In response, South Korean law mandates the assistance of interpreters during criminal procedures (Article 180 of the Criminal Procedure Act) and has introduced systems like the 2021 court interpreter certification program. However, issues such as a lack of qualified interpreters for minority languages and insufficient understanding of legal terminology among interpreters still hinder the full realization of defendants' rights. This paper addresses the constitutional foundation of the right to interpretation, emphasizing that this right derives from the principles of due process, the right to a fair trial, and bodily freedom guaranteed in the Korean Constitution. By comparing legal systems in Canada, the U.S., and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), this study examines the standards for interpretation rights and suggests improvements for South Korea's judiciary interpreting system. Key recommendations include establishing objective criteria for determining when interpretation is necessary, ensuring interpreter competence, and formalizing interpretation guidelines in the legal system to safeguard the accuracy and impartiality of court interpretation. The paper concludes that an effective judiciary interpreting system is essential to maintaining the fairness of trials in a multicultural society and calls for legislative reforms to enhance interpreter training and certification.