Court proceedings in Rwanda are primarily conducted in Kinyarwanda, and yet not every litigant is Rwandan or understands the language. As a court reporter who spends much of her time in courtrooms, I have observed interpreters translating complex legal proceedings for people from diverse linguistic backgrounds. ALSO READ: Mukantaganzwa tasks new judges with delivering timely justice This sparked my curiosity about how court interpreters are selected, what qualifications they are required to have, and how their work is supervised to ensure accurate and fair interpretation throughout proceedings. Court-provided interpreters are available Judiciary spokesperson Harrison Mutabazi explained that parties are free to hire private interpreters if they wish. However, he noted that the Judiciary also provides certified interpreters free of charge through a dedicated interpretation unit based at the Supreme Court. ALSO READ: New rules to fix gaps in how court-ordered funds are handled According to Mutabazi, anyone who needs interpretation services submits a request through the court handling their case. The Judiciary has interpreters for different languages, and this is one of the services we provide free of charge. Parties need to inform the court ahead of time so that the necessary arrangements can be made, he said in an interview with The New Times. Parties encouraged to request official interpreters To better understand how the process works in practice, The New Times also spoke to lawyer Innocent Muramira, who has represented several foreign clients in Rwandan courts. Muramira recalled handling a case involving a client from a neighbouring country who spoke only English. “Since court proceedings were conducted in Kinyarwanda, we requested an official interpreter through the court,” he said. Although parties may hire private interpreters, Muramira explained that professional interpreters typically charge between Rwf100,000 and Rwf150,000, or even more, depending on their qualifications, experience and expertise. In his case, however, they opted for an interpreter provided by the Judiciary after submitting a request through the court hearing the matter. Muramira also explained why lawyers cannot act as interpreters for their own clients. “Legally, a lawyer cannot serve as an interpreter because they are a party to the proceedings and may be perceived as biased. Official court interpreters are certified by the Supreme Court and have taken an oath to faithfully and accurately perform their duties,” he said. Regarding concerns about the possibility of inaccurate interpretation, Muramira noted that both the court and the parties' lawyers may intervene if they believe an interpretation is incorrect. He also advised anyone intending to hire a private interpreter to conduct a background check to verify the person's competence and professionalism. Where possible, he recommended that requests for court-provided interpreters be submitted at least seven days before the hearing to allow sufficient time for arrangements. What does the law say? Rwanda's laws provide a clear legal framework governing the use of interpreters and translators in court proceedings. Under the 2019 law on criminal procedure, Article 204 states that the language of the court is Kinyarwanda, although proceedings may also be conducted in another official language. The law further provides that any party to proceedings has the right to use a language they understand well, and the court is responsible for securing the services of an interpreter. Where the interpreter is not a public servant, they are entitled to remuneration proportional to the services rendered. Article 206 of the same law provides that an Order of the Minister in charge of Justice determines the calculation of fees payable to witnesses, interpreters, translators, medical doctors and other experts. Meanwhile, Article 208 requires every interpreter, translator, expert or medical doctor to take an oath before beginning their duties, swearing to perform their responsibilities faithfully, professionally and in good faith. Under Article 209, the President of the Court is responsible for appointing interpreters, translators, experts or medical doctors after verifying their qualifications. The president may delegate this responsibility to another court official. Once an interpreter has taken the oath, they are not required to take it again in subsequent proceedings. The issue is similarly addressed under the 2018 law relating to Civil, Commercial, Labour and Administrative Procedure. Article 273 provides that allowances payable to witnesses, interpreters, medical doctors and other experts are determined by the trial bench after examining documentation detailing the services provided, including the nature of the case, the requesting judge, the duration of the work and the associated costs. The law further states that these expenses are initially paid by the court but are ultimately refunded by the losing party. Where necessary, courts may also require parties to advance the fees for interpreters or experts, with the unsuccessful party reimbursing those costs at the conclusion of the case. Together, these legal provisions are intended to ensure that language does not become a barrier to accessing justice while safeguarding the accuracy, impartiality and professionalism of court interpretation services.
