Guidebook »» »» »» STANDARDS Was the quality of the translation adequately ensuring that the suspect or accused person could effectively defend him- or herself? • If the quality was not adequate, did the suspect or accused person had the possibility to complaint? And was this complain adequately addressed (eg. new written or oral translation of the documents)? Were particular needs of persons in vulnerable situations (eg, minors, persons with psychosocial or intellectual disabilities) adequately taken into account in the interpretation or translation? Is there a register for qualified interpreters and translators established? The right to interpretation and translation is recognized as an essential procedural right being a precondition for the effective exercise of his or her right to defense.129 Accordingly, it is fulfilling various purposes, namely: »» Safeguarding that the suspect or accused person understands his or her procedural rights and can effectively participate in the criminal proceedings (i.e. understands the proceedings and can state his or her position); »» Ensuring that the person can communicate and consult prior to questionings as well as hearings with the legal representative »» Enabling the preparation of the defense and ensuring the equality of arms in order to safeguard the fairness of the proceedings130 The EU Directive regulates the right to interpretation and the right to translation of essential documents. It builds upon the standards already established in the ECtHR’s case law for Article 6 ECHR.131 The recitals of the Directive make clear that the Directive is intended to facilitate the application of rights which already exist under the ECHR. From which point in time does the right of interpretation and translation apply? Persons who do not speak or understand the language of the criminal proceeding should be provided without delay, with interpretation before investigative and judicial authorities, including during police questioning, all court hearings and any necessary interim hearings.132 Also Article 36 6(3)(e) ECHR provides for the right of free interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings in all stages and of all documents that are necessary for the suspect to defend him or herself in the light of a fair trial.133 Both pre-trial and trial procedures are also covered by Article 6(3)(e) ECHR.134 In its case law the ECtHR clarified that ‘[t]he assistance of an interpreter should be provided during the investigating stage unless it is demonstrated in the light of the particular circumstances of each case that there are compelling reasons to restrict this right.’135 Written translations of the relevant documents should be provided to the suspected and accused persons within a reasonable period of time.136 What does the right of interpretation and translation cover? The EU Directive states that all suspects and accused persons who do not understand the language of the proceedings adequately shall receive interpretation and translation assistance.137 Accordingly, the Directive guarantees interpretation and translation in the native language of the suspects or accused persons or a language they speak or understand to be able to fully exercise their right of defence.138 It is not in line with EU and ECtHR standards if only the lawyer but not the suspect or accused speaks the language of the criminal proceedings. This is also true if the lawyer and the suspect or accused person can communicate with each other either with or without an interpreter in a language different of the trial.139 The reasoning behind it is that the person should be able to participate in the proceedings and interact with the lawyer about statements for his or her defence.140 The costs for translation and interpretation services should be born by the Member States irrespectively of the outcome of the proceedings.141 The Directive states that the interpretation should be provided during police interrogation and at trial, as well as for the communication between suspected or accused persons and their legal counsel in direct connection with any questioning or hearing, appeal or other procedural applications.142 In contrast, Article 6(3)(e) ECHR does not cover the interpretation services between the suspect or accused person and the counsel.143 37