Everyone needs to permit off steam from fourth dimension to fourth dimension too the IPKat is no exception. In this, the start of an occasional serial of gripes, the IPKat demands urgent activity inwards getting European Court of Justice (ECJ) cases translated into the xi (soon to hold out 21) languages of the European Union without undue delay. ECJ decisions may teach weeks or fifty-fifty months earlier they bring been translated into all the EU’s major languages, non to hollo the kid ones. Opinions of the Advocate General ― which are often to a greater extent than of import than the concluding decisions because they comprise far to a greater extent than detailed legal reasoning ― may facial expression years for translation. To hand merely 1 example, the Opinion of the Advocate General inwards Campina Melkunie (the BIOMILD case) has been unavailable inwards Danish, English linguistic communication too Greek since it was delivered on 31 Jan 2002.
This delay inwards translating is incorrect inwards regulation too damages contest for legal services inwards the EU. Consider this example: an of import ECJ parallel merchandise ruling is issued inwards French too High German but at that topographic point is no available official English linguistic communication or Castilian translation. Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 the United States attorney seeks urgent legal advice from his European counterparts but tin alone teach it from French too High German speaking attorneys. Even if English linguistic communication too Castilian practitioners read the other languages inwards which the judgment has been issued, they bring no reliable too officially sanctioned text upon which they tin rely, which puts them at a smashing disadvantage. Once a linguistic communication is oftentimes stigmatised past times belatedly translation or no translation at all, it tin do zip for the morale of practitioners inwards countries similar Hellenic Republic too Portugal whose lawyers practise amongst a perennial linguistic disadvantage too whose students must constantly report foreign-language texts of laws too decisions too hence key to their studies.
The ECJ volition say, correctly, that legal translation is a time-consuming, labour-intensive too expensive activity too that someone has to pay for it. However, all of the official languages of the European Union are meant to hold out every bit authoritative too at that topographic point are practiced political reasons why this should hold out the case. However, failing to interpret into approximately languages suggests that those languages are less of import than the others. This violates the regulation of equal access to the law. It besides makes it hard for companies too individuals to excogitation their legal too draw organisation affairs if they cannot gain access to the police pull inwards a linguistic communication that they understand. While ignorance of the police pull is no defence, people inwards jurisdictions where a translation is non available inwards their linguistic communication bring no pick but to rest ignorant.
So what tin hold out done? The intellectual belongings profession is wealthy too profitable. Its clients create too enforce cash-generating monopolies. asks: (i) how much extra would it toll to interpret all ECJ decisions too opinions into all European Union working languages? (ii) cannot the pick to pay this extra heart too soul hold out given to those of us who demand access to the police pull inwards gild to do our daily work?
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar