The right to translation in Belgian criminal proceedings: Between legal obligations and practical constraints

Sara Delva, Sarah van Hoof and Katrijn Maryns
Ghent University

This article examines the implementation of the Directive 2010/64/EU, and more specifically its provisions on written language assistance, in Belgian criminal proceedings. In order to investigate both top-down regulations and on-the-ground practices, a case study was conducted at the Ghent correctional court, including a policy review, analysis of criminal case files, and interviews with judicial actors. The study finds that the right to written translation is rarely exercised. Due to the restricted transposition of the Directive provisions into national legislation, local judicial authorities do not proactively provide translated procedural documents and defendants are often unaware of their right to translation. Instead of providing written translations, judicial authorities systematically rely on oral interpretation or summaries, despite the Directive stipulating that these should be the exception rather than the norm. Although the Directive was designed to strengthen fair trial protections, its impact remains limited in practice.

Publication history
Table of contents

To ensure a fair trial, defendants in criminal proceedings in the European Union (EU) have a number of basic procedural rights, such as the right to information and the right to legal counsel. These rights allow defendants to actively participate in the proceedings and defend themselves, but can be jeopardized if defendants do not understand the language of the proceedings, which may make it difficult for them to understand procedural documents or communicate with their legal counsel. In order to ensure that a defendant is “able to understand what is happening and to make him/herself understood” the European institutions have been working since the early 2000s to develop a legal framework that guarantees the provision of language assistance in all EU member states. These efforts resulted in Directive 2010/64/EU. This directive grants defendants who do not understand the language of the proceedings two types of free language assistance throughout the proceedings: (a) interpreter assistance during oral communication with the authorities and the defendants’ legal counsel and (b) translations of certain procedural documents.

References

Amato, Amalia, and Gabriele Mack
2015 “The IMPLI Project, Pre-Trial Interpreting in Italy and the Transposition of Directive 2010/64 EU.” TRANS Revista de Traductología 1 (19): 43–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Angermeyer, Philipp Sebastian
2015Speak English or What? Codeswitching and Interpreter Use in New York City Courts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
BBVT
2016 “Gerechtstolken en -vertalers van de regen in de drop [Court interpreters and translators, out of the frying pan into the fire].” Accessed February 26, 2025. https://​www​.lexgo​.be​/nl​/nieuws​/2016​/09​/gerechtstolken​-en​-vertalers​-van​-de​-regen​-in​-de​-drop,106653​.html
2017 “Gerechtstolken hekelen wantoestanden binnen Justitie [Court interpreters denounce mismanagement within the Justice Department].” Accessed February 26, 2025. https://​www​.jubel​.be​/gerechtstolken​-hekelen​-wantoestanden​-binnen​-justitie/
Berk-Seligson, Susan
2017The Bilingual Courtroom: Court Interpreters in the Judicial Process. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blasco Mayor, María Jesús, and Maribel del Pozo Triviño
2015 “Legal Interpreting in Spain at a Turning Point.” MonTI: Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación 7: 9–40.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bloch, Alain
2019Het strafdossier, een straf dossier [The criminal case file, quite a file]. Brugge: Die Keure.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brannan, James
2017 “Identifying Written Translation in Criminal Proceedings as a Separate Right: Scope and Supervision under European Law.” JoSTrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation 27: 43–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Braun, Virginia, and Victoria Clarke
2006 “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology.” Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2): 77–101. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chioni-Chotouman, Chara
2018 “The Right to Translation and Interpretation in Criminal Proceedings: Providing a Common Code between the Defendant and the Court.” Cambridge Law Review 3: 66–85.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cras, Steven, and Luca de Matteis
2010 “The Directive on Interpretation and Translation in Criminal Proceedings.” Eucrim 4: 153–162. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delva, Sara, Sarah van Hoof, and Katrijn Maryns
2026 “Language Assistance in the Criminal Court: How Fair Is It to Substitute Written Translation with Oral Interpreting?Interpreting. Published ahead of print. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
European Commission
2018COM(2018) 857 final. Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Implementation of Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the Right to Interpretation and Translation in Criminal Proceedings. Brussels: European Commission. https://​eur​-lex​.europa​.eu​/legal​-content​/EN​/TXT​/?uri​=CELEX:52018DC0857
2021 “September Infringements Package: Key Decisions.” Accessed February 26, 2025. https://​ec​.europa​.eu​/commission​/presscorner​/detail​/EN​/INF​_21​_4681
2023 “January Infringements Package: Key Decisions.” Accessed February 26, 2025. https://​ec​.europa​.eu​/commission​/presscorner​/detail​/EN​/inf​_23​_142
Fingas, Maciej
2019 “The Right to Interpretation and Translation in Criminal Proceedings: Challenges and Difficulties Stemming from the Implementation of the Directive 2010/64/EU.” EuCLR European Criminal Law Review 9 (2): 175–186. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gallai, Fabrizio
2013 “ ‘I’ll Just Intervene Whenever He Finds It a Bit Difficult to Answer’: Exploding the Myth of Literalism in Interpreted Interviews.” Investigative Interviewing: Research and Practice (II-RP) 5 (1): 57–78.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gialuz, Mitja
2019 “The Implementation of the Directive on Linguistic Assistance in Italy, between Changes to the Code of Criminal Procedure and Case-Law Resistance.” In EU Criminal Justice: Fundamental Rights, Transnational Proceedings and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, edited by Tommaso Rafaraci and Rosanna Belfiore, 27–41. Cham: Springer International. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giustini, Deborah
2021 “ ‘The Whole Thing is Really Managing Crisis’: Practice Theory Insights into Interpreters’ Work Experiences of Success and Failure.” The British Journal of Sociology 72 (4): 1–15. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
González Núñez, Gabriel
2013 “Translating for Linguistic Minorities in Northern Ireland: A Look at Translation Policy in the Judiciary, Healthcare, and Local Government.” Current Issues in Language Planning 14 (3–04): 474–489. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2016 “On Translation Policy.” Target: International Journal of Translation Studies 28 (1): 87–109. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hale, Sandra Beatriz
2004The Discourse of Court Interpreting: Discourse Practices of the Law, the Witness, and the Interpreter. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hertog, Erik
2015 “Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Right to Interpretation and Translation in Criminal Proceedings: Transposition Strategies with Regard to Interpretation and Translation.” MonTI: Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación 7: 73–100.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacobs, Marie
2024 “Choosing Is Losing: Language Policy and Language Choice Acts at the Asylum Law Firm.” Language Policy 23 (2): 119–145. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Katschinka, Liese
2014 “The Impact of Directive 2010/64/EU on the Right to Interpretation and Translation in Criminal Proceedings.” In Traduzione e interpretazione per la società e le istituzioni [Translation and interpreting for society and institutions], edited by Caterina Falbo and Maurizio Viezzi, 105–114. Trieste: EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meylaerts, Reine
2011 “Translational Justice in a Multilingual World: An Overview of Translational Regimes.” Meta: Journal Des Traducteurs / Meta: Translators’ Journal 56 (4): 743–757. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meylaerts, Reine, and Gabriel González Núñez
2018 “No Language Policy without Translation Policy: A Comparison of Flanders and Wales.” Language Problems and Language Planning 42 (2): 196–219. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meylaerts, Reine
2021 “Language and Translation Policies in a Bilingual City with a Multilingual Population: The Case of Brussels.” In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and the City, edited by Tong King Lee. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Muñoz de Morales Romero, Marta
2020 “Shades of Light and Darkness: The Spanish Transposition of EU Directives on the Rights of Suspected and Accused Persons.” European Criminal Law Review 10 (January): 48–65. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
NLLB Team, Marta R. Costa-jussà, James Cross, Onur Çelebi, Maha Elbayad, Kenneth Heafield, Kevin Heffernan, et al.
2022 “No Language Left Behind: Scaling Human-Centered Machine Translation.” arXiv. https://​arxiv​.org​/abs​/2207​.04672
Orlando, Daniele
2016 “Legal Translation as a Human Right: Ensuring a Fair Trial through Translation Quality and Training.” New Voices in Translation Studies 14 (1): 23–45.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pavlenko, Aneta
2023 “Language Proficiency as a Matter of Law: Judicial Reasoning on Miranda Waivers by Speakers with Limited English Proficiency (LEP).” International Journal for the Semiotics of Law / Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 37 (2): 329–357. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz
2004Introducing Interpreting Studies. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
QSR International Pty Ltd
Riehle, Cornelia, and Allison Clozel
2020 “10 Years after the Roadmap: Procedural Rights in Criminal Proceedings in the EU Today.” ERA Forum 20 (3): 321–325. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Romans, Stéphanie, Piet Depuydt, and Bert Broens
2024 “Honderden experts niet betaald door tekort van 20 miljoen bij Justitie [Hundreds of experts unpaid due to 20 million shortfall at the Justice Department].” De Tijd, November 2.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schouppe, Ward
2024 “Tolken protesteren aan gerechtsgebouw in Gent: ‘We zijn al sinds de zomer niet betaald’ [Interpreters protest outside courthouse in Ghent: ‘We haven’t been paid since summer’].” VRT NWS, November 29.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spolsky, Bernard
2003Language Policy: Key Topics in Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stake, Robert E.
1995The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Statbel
2022 “Insufficient Knowledge of the Language is the Main Barrier on the Belgian Labour Market.” Accessed September 25, 2025. https://​statbel​.fgov​.be​/en​/news​/insufficient​-knowledge​-language​-main​-barrier​-belgian​-labour​-market
2025 “36% of the Belgian Population has Foreign Background.” Accessed September 25, 2025. https://​statbel​.fgov​.be​/en​/themes​/population​/structure​-population​/origin
Stevens, Sarah
2020 “Invisible Touch: Analyzing the Language Conduit Theory through the Lens of Translation and Interpreting Principles.” UMKC Law Review 88 (3): 771–790.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traest, Philip
2011 “Het proces-verbaal van verhoor en/of aangifte [The official record of interrogation and/or complaint].” Cahiers Politiestudies 21 (4): 33–52.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Trechsel, Stefan
2006Human Rights in Criminal Proceedings. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van den Wyngaert, Chris, Steven Vandromme, and Philip Traest
2022Strafrecht en strafprocesrecht in hoofdlijnen [Criminal law and criminal procedure]. Antwerpen: Gompel&Svacina.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vanden Bosch
2017 “Het recht op vertolking en vertaling in strafzaken en de omzetting van de EU-richtlijnen [The right to interpretation and translation in criminal cases and the transposition of the EU directives].” Tijdschrift voor Strafrecht [Journal for criminal law] 2: 79–107.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verliefde, Sofie, and Bart Defrancq
2023 “Interpreter-Mediated Access to the Written Record in Police Interviews.” Perspectives 31 (3): 519–547. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vieira, Lucas Nunes, Minako O’Hagan, and Carol O’Sullivan
2021 “Understanding the Societal Impacts of Machine Translation: A Critical Review of the Literature on Medical and Legal Use Cases.” Information, Communication & Society 24 (11): 1515–1532. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vogiatzis, Nikos
2022 “Interpreting the Right to Interpretation under Article 6(3)(e) ECHR: A Cautious Evolution in the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights?Human Rights Law Review 22 (1): 1–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar

Address for correspondence

Sara Delva

Department of Translation, Interpreting, and Communication

Ghent University

Groot-Brittanniëlaan 45

9000 Ghent

Belgium

[email protected]

Co-author information

 
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue