First establish the role of the person being questioned
Preparation begins by establishing the capacity in which the person will be questioned. A witness gives testimony, while a suspect or accused person gives explanations. The notices of rights provided before the procedural act also differ. Information from the summons, the case reference and the subject matter link the preparation material to the correct situation. Describing it simply as “questioning by the Police” is insufficient if the documents supplied cover acts concerning several people or different stages of proceedings. It is useful to identify which documents relate to the person requiring Ukrainian translation or interpreting.
Art. 204 § 1 pkt 2 KPK requires an interpreter to be called when a person who does not speak Polish needs to be questioned. Art. 72 also governs free assistance for an accused person without sufficient command of Polish, and provisions concerning the accused apply accordingly to suspects. [1] The basis for participation therefore does not depend solely on the location. The person’s status and language needs matter. When arranging preparation, give the interpreter the activity type and current subject matter, without assigning the participant a role based only on an informal description of the case.
Notices of rights and decisions before answering
Interpretation before questioning may include notices of rights, the charge presented and information about how the activity will proceed. The conditions and scope of the stated entitlement matter, as does distinguishing an option from an obligation. If a participant does not understand a term or condition in the notice, the passage requiring explanation should be clear. The interpreter reproduces both the official’s statement and the participant’s question. Any further explanation then comes from the appropriate person and can be linked to what was actually communicated during the activity.
In Baytar v. Turkey, the European Court of Human Rights (ETPC) assessed the absence of an interpreter during police questioning and its significance for understanding rights and the consequences of decisions made at that stage. Providing interpreting later did not remedy the problem of understanding the earlier act. [3] The ruling highlights the importance of language assistance from the point at which a person needs to understand their procedural position. Preparation should therefore cover not only questions about the event but also documents and information presented before those questions. The individual elements should retain their proper sequence.
Questions, answers and degree of certainty
When interpreting an answer, it is important to distinguish “I saw”, “I heard from someone else” and “I assume”. Lack of recollection cannot be replaced with an unequivocal denial, nor an assumption turned into a statement of fact. A question containing a negation or condition likewise requires those elements to be preserved. If a statement includes several events, organising it in interpretation should retain the temporal relationship presented by the person being questioned. Changing the sequence can produce a different account of events even when all named people and places remain the same.
A participant should be able to hear the entire question interpreted before answering. Longer statements can usefully be divided into segments that the interpreter can reproduce while preserving their content. If a question is unclear, interpreting also covers the request for clarification and the clarification provided. If the difficulty arises from sound or overlapping voices, it must be distinguished from unfamiliarity with a word. Identifying this allows a statement to be repeated appropriately or a term explained, rather than introducing meaning into an answer that the participant did not themselves express.
Questions that already contain an assumption require particular care, for example those asking when a participant received a document. The person being questioned may answer that they did not receive it and then explain how they know its contents. The interpretation must retain both elements, instead of reducing the answer to an approximate date. Similarly, expressions such as “approximately”, “probably” and “as I remember” must not disappear. Where several people are named, it must remain clear to whom a pronoun refers. If a participant corrects an earlier answer, both the correction and what it concerns must be reproduced. This allows the person conducting the questioning to identify what information changed and whether the change concerns a date, a person, an amount or the course of events. This is a practical way of protecting the substance of a statement against changes caused simply by shortening communication.
Documents, messages and identifiers used in questions
Questioning may concern correspondence, invoices, contracts or a conversation record. For interpretation, it is important to establish which material is being shown and who created it. Messages require a distinction between the sending date, the date of the event described and the printout date. If a question concerns an attachment, its number or page should be identified. An extract without context may not reveal what a pronoun or answer refers to. Preparation material should therefore retain the context needed to establish meaning.
Names of people and entities should be linked to documents identifying their spelling. The Act on the Profession of Sworn Translator sets a rule for transliteration or transcription of first names and surnames written in a non-Latin alphabet, based on a travel document or its copy or, if unavailable, the rules of the country where the document was prepared. [2] When several people are questioned, distinguishing a shared surname and different document holders also matters. Earlier correspondence may contain a different spelling of a name; it should be identified as part of that material rather than automatically corrected.
Reading the record before signing
Art. 150 § 1 KPK provides for the record to be signed by participants in the activity, except the record of a trial or hearing. Before signature, the record must be read aloud and this noted. Under § 2, a participant may raise objections to its contents when signing; these must be entered along with the statement of the person conducting the activity. [1] This is an important stage of questioning. A participant needing interpretation should be able to understand the record presented, not only the earlier questions and answers.
When comparing the record with what occurred, focus on specific information: who acted, the time, place, amount, a negative statement or degree of certainty. If part of an answer is missing from the record, identify the passage concerned. Not every difference between spoken words and the written record has the same character; its effect on meaning matters. Interpretation of the record when read aloud should allow that difference to be identified. The rule on signing a record of questioning should not automatically be extended to the trial record, which the Code excludes from that provision.
Working conditions and identifying unclear points
The research review by Goodman-Delahunty, Martschuk, Hale and Brandon concerns interpreter-mediated police interviews, including interpreting accuracy and communication arrangements. The authors discuss research from different systems without establishing a single Polish questioning procedure. [4] When organising a particular act, check that all voices can be heard, displayed materials are accessible and speakers can be identified. In a remote conversation, the page number or file shown to participants should be clearly identified so that questions and answers concern the same material.
A sworn translator is required to exercise special care, impartiality and confidentiality. [2] A translation issue therefore requires identifying the actual statement and its translation. This may be a question containing a specific condition, an answer expressing uncertainty or a term appearing in a document. Identifying the date of the act and the location of the problem helps establish the material to be checked. If a difficulty arises during questioning, naming it enables the relevant passage to be repeated or explained before further questions are based on misunderstood content.
Questions and answers
Can a witness need an interpreter at the Police?
Yes. Art. 204 § 1 pkt 2 KPK concerns the need to question a person who does not speak Polish, not only the accused. The request should identify the language, the role stated in the summons and the particular activity. Art. 72 governs the accused’s separate rights. [1]
What should be checked when the record is read out?
Above all, consistency of key details and the meaning of answers: people, dates, amounts, negatives and expressed uncertainty. Art. 150 allows a participant to raise objections to the record's content when signing. It is useful to identify the exact passage concerned. [1]
What material is useful before questioning?
The summons and document defining the subject of the activity, relevant attachments, a list of names and documents establishing the spelling of personal details. For correspondence, retain the message sequence and identification of authors. A personal account should be separated from documents presented as sources of information.