Poland’s Prosecutor’s office wants to interrogate the Ex-interpreter of EU Council President Donald Tusk. Translators can be the secret forced? An Interview with the conference interpreter Isabella Gusenburger.
In July, US President Trumps interpreter Marina (l.) caught the attention of the policy
Almost nine years ago, in the crash of the Polish presidential plane near the Russian city of Smolensk 96 people died, including the then President Lech Kaczynski and high-ranking military. The Polish PiS government of an assassination attempt, since 2017 will be determined in the previously completed case again.
The focus of the studies is also the President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, then Polish Prime Minister. The public Prosecutor’s office accuses him of treason. You want to know what he has discussed the crash with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Also at the talks present an interpreter Magdalena Fitas-Dukaczewska to be interrogated. In a contribution to the DFL, she said she didn’t want to testify, even if the government would release you from your duty of confidentiality. That would shatter their credibility and that of other interpreters.
Isabella Gusenburger has been working for 24 years as a conference interpreter, among other things, for the Federal government. She has often interpreted in Four-on-one meetings.
DW: Mrs Gusenburger, would you have acted in the place of their colleague, Mrs Fitas-Dukaczewska the same way?
Isabella Gusenburger: I would, of course, tried to me before, legally secure, but in the Rest of the would have been my aspiration, to do the same, of course. This is one of the fundamental principles of our profession, as Mrs Fitas-Dukaczewska: we guarantee confidentiality. It is very important that the conversation partners can trust us that we will give nothing to the outside.
Vladimir Putin (left) and Donald Tusk during a video conference at the crash site of the Polish machine on the 10. April 2010
In the “code of ethics” of the International Association of conference interpreters, to which they belong, it is said that interpreters are bound by non-public events to “the strictest secrecy”. There are exceptions, such as with conversation content, the criminal law may be relevant?
This of course is the whole point. There has been a discussion about whether you could release the interpreter, theoretically, from the obligation of confidentiality. I didn’t deal specifically with this discussion, because I had to. I never had a case in which it is critical for me. But I do know that there were different legal interpretations, that there were certainly people who have said, interpreters can relieve in such cases, the duty of confidentiality, it was not legally anchored as firmly as, for example, in the case of Doctors or lawyers.
I must confess that I don’t know if this discussion was continued, so far, it has been found, for example, for Germany, there is a clear legal answer. But our aim of course, is always that we can not be relieved of the duty of confidentiality.
Who is not concealed, you have to count with sanctions
It is in this principle, a voluntary self-commitment, or you may be prosecuted if you violate it?
He extent to which a sanction is reinforced, I can’t tell you. We must, however, often for particular meetings or generally for a Ministry or a government Agency non-disclosure agreements to sign. The are armed in some Form of sanction in the economy often, for example, with the reimbursement of the financial damage incurred can be very high, if somewhere something will come out. In the case of the Federal government or state Agencies there are other sanctions.
What are the rules you must observe the interpreter in confidential talks?
Confidentiality is particularly considered in the case of controversial political or economic discussions often something more. It relates not only to the content of what is said, but also, for example, on the place where a conversation takes place, or a point in time. This is often associated with the security.
Often the interpreters know in advance that somebody meets with somebody, somewhere. The Public should not know but because there is, for example, a stroke risk. To ensure safety, is made known to such a Meeting only in retrospect, and also, the interpreter must not trombones before, where he goes and who he meets.
Have you experienced in your career that interpreters were put under pressure to disclose information? If Yes, by whom?
It was in my career, in smaller situations, where, for example, journalists are in the cabin came in and said: “you have to get the speech text of President or Prime Minister So-and-So in advance, we can have the now?” These are situations in which, if one is inexperienced as an interpreter, could come in the temptation, as a Text. We don’t do that. We always refer to the respective employees who are responsible for public Relations.
Isabella Gusenburger works as a conference interpreter in the following languages: German, Polish, Russian, and Spanish
Magdalena Fitas-Dukaczewska is not the first interpreter, who is put under pressure to reveal contents of confidential conversations. In the USA, the Democrats demanded in July that the interpreter of President Donald Trump in front of the Congress to the Four-on-one meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki says. Such situations from their point of view, individual cases are, or is it a widespread phenomenon?
I think the individual cases are not, at least in this Form, if you really know how to behave, if by trained lawyers, it is claimed, we must say that the statements and other lawyers, you should remain calm. A case like that, I have experienced never before. I know of no colleagues who have experienced this. This is, I believe, something very rare. It sometimes happens that one comes from a Four-eye conversation, and someone in the Delegation asked what was being discussed. In such cases, we say: “The personal staff of the Minister was to ask the.”
“We do not remember what was said”
What helps us in the practice enormously, is that we can’t remember at this Four-on-one meetings in General, the things we interpret. We can rely with complete justification, to the fact that we can’t even remember properly what was said.
What do you mean by that?
The consecutive interpreting is the most used mode of interpreting in such conversations. It interprets without technology, only with a Notepad. The interpreting notes technique is only reliable within the next ten minutes to identify, because it works with symbols that are just a support memory, information on the memo authorized content blocks, which must be supplemented in the Situation.
If we are hours or months, or as in the case of a woman Fitas-Dukaczewska years later, asked what was said, we can often truthfully say: “I don’t know.” And our brain is designed in such a way that it deletes at this concentration that the preceding Information immediately to the next record. That is to say, interpreters are very poor spies.
So would you be able to your own notes a week later, no longer decipher?
You can roughly tell what it was, but the full meaning will it no longer be determined.
Isabella Gusenburger is an interpreter and translator for German, Polish, Russian, and Spanish.
The conversation Helena Kaschel.