Voici les éléments 1 - 4 sur 4
- PublicationAccès libreRelations de travail: quand le droit pénal s'en mêle
- PublicationAccès libreThe (In-)Visibility of Interpreters in Legal Wiretapping — A Case Study: How the Swiss Federal Court Clears or Thickens the FogInterpreters in lawful interception of communications are an almost invisible group of lan-guage professionals. They participate in secret surveillance measures and enable law enforce-ment authorities to intercept conversations held in a foreign language. This group of transla-tional agents who perform a hybrid activity between interpreting and translation within an institutional legal context has received scant attention from either translation and interpret-ing or legal studies. If the topic is addressed at all, it is most often examined within the context of police interpreting, even though intercept interpreters do not participate in the kind of tri-adic communication situation typical of face-to-face interpreting. Moreover, the sensitive context makes it difficult to collect data on the topic. In this article, we analyse nine judgments rendered by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (FSC) from 2002 to 2019 concerning lawful in-terception with interpreters. Higher courts not only dispense justice but also contribute to the continued development of the law. Their judgments are also a rich source of knowledge, providing rare information about an understudied research area. These judgments are crucial because, as we will argue, it is the legal order and its implementation through jurisprudence that shape the degree of (in-)visibility of intercept interpreters. In addition, these judgments provide valuable information about the working processes and professional context of inter-cept interpreters. Our qualitative content analysis reveals that the FSC explicitly demands the visibility of intercept interpreters and their activity in some cases while implicitly accepting or deliberately generating their invisibility in others.
- PublicationMétadonnées seulementWird das Gerichtsurteil von der Reihenfolge der angehörten Zeugenaussagen beinflusst?