13 Interpreters

13.1 Chief officers are responsible for making arrangements (see paragraph 13.1ZA) to provide appropriately qualified independent persons to act as interpreters and to provide translations of essential documents for detained suspects who, in accordance with paragraph 3.5(c)(iii), the custody officer has determined require an interpreter.

If the suspect has a hearing or speech impediment, references to ‘interpreter’ and ‘interpretation’ in this Code include appropriate assistance necessary to establish effective communication with that person. See paragraph 13.1C if the detainee is in Wales.

13.1 ZA References in paragraph 13.1 above and elsewhere in this Code (see paragraphs 3.14(a), 13.2, 13.3, 13.5, 13.6, 13.9, 13.10A, 13.10D and 13.11 below and in any other Code, to making arrangements for an interpreter to assist a suspect, mean making arrangements for the interpreter to be physically present in the same location as the suspect unless the provisions in paragraph 13.12 below, and Part 1 of Annex L, allow live-link interpretation to be used.

13.1 A The arrangements must comply with the minimum rights to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings (see Paragraph 13.1AA and Note 13A). The provisions of this Code implement those minimum rights for those to whom this Code applies. These requirements include the following:

That the arrangements made and the quality of interpretation and translation provided shall be sufficient to ‘safeguard the fairness of the proceedings, in particular by ensuring that suspected or accused persons have knowledge of the cases against them and are able to exercise their right of defence’. This term means that the suspect must be able to understand their position and be able to communicate effectively with police officers, interviewers, solicitors and appropriate adults as provided for by this and any other Code in the same way as a suspect who can speak and understand English who does not have a hearing or speech impediment and who would not require an interpreter. See paragraphs 13.12 to 13.14 and Annex L for application to live-link interpretation

The provision of a written translation of all documents considered essential for the person to exercise their right of defence and to ‘safeguard the fairness of the proceedings’ as described above. For the purposes of this Code, this includes any decision to authorise a person to be detained and details of any offence(s) with which the person has been charged or for which they have been told they may be prosecuted, see Annex K.

Procedures to help determine:

whether a suspect can speak and understand English and needs the assistance of an interpreter (see paragraph 13.1 and Notes 13B and 13C); and

whether another interpreter should be called or another translation should be provided when a suspect complains about the quality of either or both (see paragraphs 13.10A and 13.10C).

13.1AA Arrangements referred to in this paragraph must comply with the minimum rights provided by retained EU Law. These provisions continue to exist in retained EU Law, and as of 29 June 2023 there is legislation before the UK Parliament to make provision for this retained EU Law to become assimilated law.

13.1 B All reasonable attempts should be made to make the suspect understand that interpretation and translation will be provided at public expense.

13.1 C With regard to persons in Wales, nothing in this or any other Code affects the application of the Welsh Language Schemes produced by police and crime commissioners in Wales in accordance with the Welsh Language Act 1993. See paragraphs 3.14 and 13.1.

13.2 Unless paragraphs 11.2 or 11.11(c) apply, a suspect who for the purposes of this Code requires an interpreter because they do not appear to speak or understand English (see paragraphs 3.5(c)(ii) and 3.14) must not be interviewed unless arrangements are made for a person capable of interpreting to assist the suspect to understand and communicate.

13.3 If a person who is a juvenile or a vulnerable person is interviewed and the person acting as the appropriate adult, does not appear to speak or understand English, arrangements must be made for an interpreter to assist communication between the between the person, the appropriate adult and the interviewer, unless the interview is urgent and paragraphs 11.2 or 11.11(c) apply.

13.4 In the case of a person making a statement under caution to a police officer or other police staff other than in English:

(a) the interpreter shall record the statement in the language it is made;

(b) the person shall be invited to sign it;

(c) an official English translation shall be made in due course.

See paragraphs 13.12 to 13.14 and Annex L for application to live-link interpretation.

13.5 Unless paragraphs 11.2 or 11.11(c) (urgent interviews) apply, a suspect who for the purposes of this Code requires an interpreter or other appropriate assistance to enable effective communication with them because they appear to have a hearing or speech impediment (see paragraphs 3.5(c)(ii) and 3.14) must not be interviewed without arrangements having been made to provide an independent person capable of interpreting or of providing other appropriate assistance.

13.6 An interpreter should also be arranged if a person who is a juvenile or a vulnerable person is interviewed and the person who is present as the appropriate adult appears to have a hearing or speech impediment, unless the interview is urgent and paragraphs 11.2 or 11.11(c) apply.

13.7 Not used

13.8 Not used.

13.9 If paragraph 6.1 applies and the detainee cannot communicate with the solicitor because of language, hearing or speech difficulties, arrangements must be made for an interpreter to enable communication. A police officer or any other police staff may not be used for this purpose.

13.10 After the custody officer has determined that a detainee requires an interpreter (see paragraph 3.5(c)(ii)) and following the initial action in paragraphs 3.1 to 3.5, arrangements must also be made for an interpreter to explain:

the grounds and reasons for any authorisation of their detention under the provisions of the Terrorism Act 2000 or the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 (post-charge questioning) to which this Code applies; and

any information about the authorisation given to them by the authorising officer or (as the case may be) the court and which is recorded in the custody record.

See sections 14 and 15 of this Code.

13.10A If a detainee complains that they are not satisfied with the quality of interpretation, the custody officer or (as the case may be) the interviewer, is responsible for deciding whether to make arrangements for a different interpreter in accordance with the procedures set out in the arrangements made by the chief officer, see paragraph 13.1A.

13.10B Written translations, oral translations and oral summaries of essential documents in a language the detainee understands shall be provided in accordance with Annex K (Translations of documents and records).

13.10C If a detainee complains that they are not satisfied with the quality of the translation, the custody officer or (as the case may be) the interviewer, is responsible for deciding whether a further translation should be provided in accordance with the procedures set out in the arrangements made by the chief officer, see paragraph 13.1A.

13.10 D If a suspect challenges a decision:

made by the custody officer in accordance with this Code (see paragraph 3.5(c)(ii)) that they do not require an interpreter, or

made in accordance with paragraphs 13.10A, 13.10B or 13.10C not to make arrangements to provide a different interpreter or another translation or not to translate a requested document,

the matter shall be reported to an inspector to deal with as a complaint for the purposes of paragraph 9.3 or 12.10 if the challenge is made during an interview.

13.11 The following must be recorded in the custody record or as applicable, interview record:

(a) Action taken to arrange for an interpreter, including the live-link requirements in Annex L as applicable;

(b) Action taken when a detainee is not satisfied about the standard of interpretation or translation provided, see paragraphs 13.10A and 13.10C;

(c) When an urgent interview is carried out in accordance with paragraph 13.2 or 13.5 in the absence of an interpreter;

(d) When a detainee has been assisted by an interpreter for the purpose of providing or being given information or being interviewed;

(e) Action taken in accordance with Annex K when:

a written translation of an essential document is provided;

an oral translation or oral summary of an essential document is provided instead of a written translation and the authorising officer’s reason(s) why this would not prejudice the fairness of the proceedings (see Annex K, paragraph 3);

a suspect waives their right to a translation of an essential document (see Annex K, paragraph 4);

when representations that a document which is not included in the table is essential and that a translation should be provided are refused and the reason for the refusal (see Annex K, paragraph 8).

{:#bookmark68}{:#bookmark72} 13.12 In this section and in Annex L, ‘live-link interpretation’ means an arrangement to enable communication between the suspect and an interpreter who is not physically present with the suspect. The arrangement must ensure that anything said by any person in the suspect’s presence and hearing can be interpreted in the same way as if the interpreter was physically present at that time. The communication must be by audio and visual means for the purpose of an interview, and for all other purposes it may be either; by audio and visual means, or by audio means.

This is required for interviews conducted and recorded in accordance with the Code of Practice for the video recording with sound of interviews of persons detained under section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and of persons for whom an authorisation to question after charge has been given under section 22 of the Counter-Terrorism act 2008 (see Note 13D). In these each of these cases, the interview must be video recorded with sound and during that interview, live link interpretation must enable:

(i) the suspect, the interviewer, solicitor, appropriate adult and any other person physically present with the suspect at any time during the interview and an interpreter who is not physically present, to see and hear each other; and

(ii) the interview to be conducted and recorded in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Code, subject to the modifications in Part 2 of Annex L.

Interviews are not required following an arrest under section 43B of the Terrorism Act 2000.

This applies to communication for the purposes of any provision of this Code except as described in (a), which requires or permits information to be given to, sought from, or provided by a suspect, whether orally or in writing, which would include communication between the suspect and their solicitor and/or appropriate adult, and for these cases, live link interpretation must:

(i) enable the suspect, the person giving or seeking that information, any other person physically present with the suspect at that time and an interpreter who is not so present, to either see and hear each other, or to hear without seeing each other (for example by using a telephone); and

(ii) enable that information to be given to, sought from, or provided by, the suspect in accordance with the provisions of this Code that apply to that information, as modified for the purposes of the live-link, by Part 2 of Annex L.

13.12 A The requirement in sub-paragraphs 13.12(a)(ii) and (b)(ii), that live-link interpretation must enable compliance with the relevant provisions of the specified Codes, means that the arrangements must provide for any written or electronic record of what the suspect says in their own language which is made by the interpreter, to be securely transmitted without delay so that the suspect can be invited to read, check and if appropriate, sign or otherwise confirm that the record is correct or make corrections to the record.

13.13 Chief officers must be satisfied that live-link interpretation used in their force area for the purposes of paragraphs 13.12(a) and (b), provides for accurate and secure communication with the suspect. This includes ensuring that at any time during which live link interpretation is being used, a person cannot see, hear or otherwise obtain access to any communications between the suspect and interpreter or communicate with the suspect or interpreter unless so authorised or allowed by the custody officer or in the case of an interview, the interviewer and that as applicable, the confidentiality of any private consultation between a suspect and their solicitor and appropriate adult (see paragraphs 13.2A, 13.6 and 13.9) is maintained. See Annex L paragraph 4.

13A Chief officers have discretion when determining the individuals or organisations they use to provide interpretation and translation services for their forces provided that these services are compatible with the requirements. One example which chief officers may wish to consider is the Ministry of Justice commercial agreements for interpretation and translation services.

13B A procedure for determining whether a person needs an interpreter might involve a telephone interpreter service or using cue cards or similar visual aids which enable the detainee to indicate their ability to speak and understand English and their preferred language. This could be confirmed through an interpreter who could also assess the extent to which the person can speak and understand English.

13C There should also be a procedure for determining whether a suspect who requires an interpreter requires assistance in accordance with paragraph 3.20 to help them check and if applicable, sign any documentation.

13D The Code of Practice referred to in paragraph 13.12, is availablehere: [https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/terrorism-act-2000-video-recording-code-of-]practice.](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/terrorism-act-2000-video-recording-code-of-practice)