On April 23, 2024, a cross-examination of the plaintiff (applicant for refugee status) in a Filipino refugee status lawsuit was held at the Tokyo District Court with a Tagalog interpreter.
During the 80-minute interrogation, the meaning of my main question was often not conveyed to the plaintiff, and his answers often differed from the question. When I asked the question again to clarify it, it became more and more confusing, and the I also became confused about what was going on. After a while, the interpreter would ask us to repeat the question I had asked, but it was impossible to repeat the exact same question. Even the word "one million" could not be translated into Japanese properly, such as the word "1.6 million" was translated into 16,000, then into 1,600, and the numbers finally could not be translated properly.
After the plaintiff's personal examination was over, I asked the plaintiff about it, and he told me in English that he could not understand the interpretation of my question. When I asked a few Filipinos in the audience who also speak Japanese, they told me that the interpreter was not good at all. (Thanks to the observers.)
After the break, I complained to the judge about the problem with the interpreter before he restarted the cross-examination. I complained that the meaning of the questions was not being conveyed to the plaintiff, that there were a series of muddled exchanges, that I did not understand the meaning of the interpreter's Japanese, and that she could not even translate the numbers. I complained that it was intolerable to have the results of such questioning used as evidence to write a ruling. The plaintiff is a Filipino activist who would be targeted for extrajudicial killings if he were sent back to the Philippines. For him, his life or death could be misguided because of the interpreter.
When I complained, the judge seemed to sense that there was a problem with the interpreter, and after a conference, he decided to suspend the questioning, select a new interpreter for the next round, and redo the main questioning. It was a very questionable interrogation, making us wonder if there was any way for the court to check the interpreter's ability.
However, Tagalog interpreters at the Immigration Bureau are even worse. I often see interpreters who summarize their own opinions even though the person in question has spoken for a long time, or interpreters who give their own opinions in the middle of the questioning. It is unbearable for the person concerned to have his or her fate decided by such a lax interpreter when his or her life is at stake.