馬來西亞法庭中文通譯之工作現況

Abstract

1990年5月10日，時任馬來亞大法官下達通令，指示馬來半島的所有法庭遵守《1963/67國語法令》之修訂，改以國語（馬來語）進行審訊。然而，受到歷史和社會因素的影響，馬來西亞華裔對國語的重視程度普遍較低，水準亦良莠不齊，在許多法庭程序中仍須仰賴通譯協助。大馬國內針對法庭通譯的研究極為有限，最近期的相關研究已逾廿年。僅管現有研究已點出中文通譯嚴重短缺，可能會影響訴訟當事人的權益，但對於中文通譯在履行職責時所面臨的挑戰仍缺乏討論。本研究旨在探討中文法庭通譯的現況，以及他們在司法體系中擔任多重角色時所面臨的挑戰和機遇。本研究採用質性研究方法，通過實地觀察和半結構式訪談蒐集受訪者的職業特性和工作經驗。本研究以曾任或現任公務員法庭中文通譯為研究主體，共14位法庭中文通譯員參與了半結構式訪談。此外，研究還執行了三場實地觀察，以更全面了解法庭環境和通譯員的工作情況。訪談資料顯示，文書工作佔據了80%-90%的工作時間，比20年前增加了30%-40%，導致「文員角色」超越了「口譯員角色」的現象。儘管口譯工作僅佔10%-20%時間，但受訪者均視口譯為最艱鉅的挑戰。究其原因，是政府從未提供中文口筆譯的訓練，且缺乏官方承認或由官方編纂的大馬法律中文參考資料。此外，僵化的工作環境和晉升制度以及限縮的培訓機會，也直接影響了中文通譯員的工作表現和職涯發展。不過，本研究也發現，儘管缺乏司法機關的支持，中文通譯員卻致力於化逆境為轉機，主動進修並且樂觀應對工作中的挑戰，展現出強大的韌性。然而，若政府在明確界定通譯職責、人才招聘和培訓制度上仍消極被動，法庭中文通譯的供需矛盾將愈加嚴重。因此，本研究建議，政府應針對法庭通譯制度進行全面改革，且務必將中文法庭通譯納入改革考量之內，以打破現行的惡性循環，確保司法服務的品質與效率，否則將進一步損害民眾的語言權益。

The National Language (Malay) has been dominant in Peninsular Malaysian courts since the instruction by the then Chief Justice of Malaya on May 10, 1990, following amendments to the National Language Act 1963/67. However, due to historical and societal factors, many Malaysian Chinese have traditionally placed less importance on the Malay language. Consequently, many Chinese have varying Malay proficiency, often necessitating interpreters for legal proceedings. Research on the practice of court interpretation in Malaysia is notably scarce, with the most recent studies dating back over two decades. While existing research has highlighted the critical shortage of Chinese-speaking court interpreters and its potential to affect litigants’ rights adversely, there has been limited academic discussion on the specific challenges Chinese-speaking court interpreters face in carrying out their duties. This study examined the working conditions of Chinese-speaking staff court interpreters and their perceptions of challenges and opportunities encountered while working in multiple roles within the court system. A qualitative approach, employing field observations and semi-structured interviews, was used to gather information on participants’ job characteristics and experiences. Chinese-speaking court interpreters were eligible to participate if they were currently or had previously been employed as staff court interpreters within the civil service system. Fourteen Chinese-speaking interpreters each participated in a semi-structured interview. Additionally, three court observations were conducted to understand better the courtroom environment and interpreting settings. Analysis of interview data revealed that clerical duties now took up over 80-90% of the participants’ working time, a 30-40% increase from 20 years ago. Consequently, the “clerk” role outweighed the “interpreter” role, even though they were designated court interpreters. Despite constituting only 10-20% of their workload, participants consistently identified interpretation as the most challenging task. This was primarily attributed to the absence of formal training in Chinese translation and interpretation and the lack of officially recognized or government-published Chinese legal reference materials. The study further revealed that rigid work environments, inflexible advancement systems, and limited training opportunities have significantly negatively impacted interpreters’ job performance and career development. However, the study also identified resiliency among Chinese-speaking staff court interpreters, who often transformed workplace challenges into opportunities. Many took the initiative to pursue further education and responded optimistically to the challenges they faced in their roles. The government’s persistent passivity in clarifying interpreter responsibilities, talent recruitment, and training systems implementation likely leads to an inability to attract and retain qualified professionals. Unique considerations should be given to Chinese-speaking staff court interpreters, and the government should make systemic reforms to prevent a vicious cycle and ensure a high-quality and efficient judicial system. Otherwise, it will further compromise the public’s language rights.