A senior police officer warned Irish-language courts could be “open to abuse” if introduced in Northern Ireland, according to declassified documents released on Tuesday by the Northern state archives.
“Should persons be given the options of a preferred language when English would be no barrier to the fair administration of justice it would only slow down the whole process and, I would suspect, be open to abuse,” assistant chief constable Judith Gillespie wrote in a letter dated March 30th, 2004.
She was responding to a consultation letter from an inter-departmental subgroup which was considering the use of Irish in courts and tribunals in Northern Ireland in the context of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages.
This included the provision – which was ultimately not adopted – for court proceedings to potentially be conducted in the relevant language, if requested by one of the parties.
RM Block
The senior Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) officer also raised concerns over time and cost.
She outlined that of approximately 36,000 cases prosecuted in the Magistrates’ Court each year, “as far as I can ascertain, there has not been a single case in the last eight years where a witness or defendant has required or necessitated the needs of an interpreter for the Irish language, although there have been cases of Portuguese, Italian and French interpreters having to be used”.
She said this slowed proceedings and she felt “that even for an Irish-language court, there would still be a need to use translators and interpreters for Irish to English to assist court officials and police officers who are not Irish speakers”.
The response from Gillespie was one of a number received by the subgroup, which included a letter from the Council of the County Court Judges questioning why resources should be dedicated to Irish ahead of other languages given its use was out of “choice rather than necessity”.
In a letter dated April 1st, 2004, the council said the courts were “used” to making provisions for translation to ensure all parties involved could understand legal proceedings, and the consequences were the same “no matter what language was involved”.
“In terms of the use of a particular minority language, Irish, this may give rise to the question why other languages should not be accorded the same facilities,” the body wrote. “This is particularly so when, for example, there is a growing Chinese community and, in one area, a sizeable Portuguese community.
“Given that the members of these communities may have great difficulties with English ... there is an argument that funds should be channelled towards their needs in priority to the needs of others for whom the use of a particular language would be one of choice rather than necessity.”
It also questioned why Ulster Scots had not been included and said it would be “interesting to consider whether this exclusion and that of other minority languages could give rise to legal proceedings”.
The council concluded that the overall obligation “is to afford any person before the courts a fair trial” and “in the balance of rights, we could have to express concerns” that the provision of court proceedings in Irish “will have an adverse impact on the provision of a legal process that is fair and timely”. The council expressed concerns that such a provision would “have the serious potential to undermine the confidence of the public, from whatever part of the community, in the administration of justice”.
Earlier this year, the 1737 law which established English as the only language permitted in legal proceedings in Northern Ireland was repealed by the UK government.
While this was an “important recognition of the importance of Irish to many in our community”, the Northern Ireland Department of Justice said, “it does not, however, change the common law position that English is the working language of the courts”.
“Any application to use a language other than English is a matter for the courts to determine in the interest of justice,” a Department spokeswoman said.
