TNAG-1922-FCO40-2727-Future-of-the-judiciary-in-Hong-Kong-1989 — Page 131

Chinese Language Officers and 106 Senior Chinese Language Officers in their establishment of 493 officers. In the Judiciary we have only 1 Chief Court Interpreter and 6 Senior Court Interpreters in our establishment of 156 which is about one-third that of the Chinese Language Officers. This means that the chance of advancement for the Chinese Language Officers to the chief rank is 1 to 29 whereas that of the Court Interpreters is 1 to 156 and the chance of promotion for the Chinese Language Officers to the senior rank is 1 to 4.6 whereas that of the Court Interpreters is 1 to 26.

If

What a gross injustice this is to the Court Interpreters! Justice means anything, it cannot be this.

We are being seriously discriminated against. The Court Interpreters and the Chinese Language Officers were categorized by the Standing Commission on Civil Service Salaries and Conditions of Service as grades primarily for degree holders and as being on a par with and comparable to each other. Similar career features were formulated for these two grades. The questions that need to be asked now are What is the cause of the distant disparity in career prospects now existing between these two grades and who should be held responsible for it?

This unhealthy state of affairs reflects a serious flaw in the managerial mechanism in the Judiciary which has crippled its normal functions of career planning for the staff that a responsible administration would discharge. The persistent refusal to identify the need to care for the staff is another contributary factor to the present deformed career structure for the Court Interpreters. We feel anguish at the couldn't-care-less attitude of the irresponsible management of the Judiciary that has brought about a stagnance in the development of career prospects for us. What has caused a deeper sense of anguish is the sense of betrayal that many, who displayed their loyalty by remaining at the closing of the grade 15 years ago, the way they have been treated by the uncaring Judiciary. We deserve a full explanation from the officer responsible for the management of the Court Interpreter Grade for the grave injustice done to us through his inertia and dereliction of his duty.

feel at

Quite apart from the obligation to look after the interest of the staff, the Judiciary owes a duty to the public to ensure that a high standard of interpretation service in court is maintained. To achieve this objective, the position of the Court Interpreters must be raised to compete on equal terms with comparable grades for bright and capable candidates. The existing unfair treatment to the Court Interpreters would only frustrate the morale of serving officers and act as a deterrent to potential candidates thinking of Joining this profession. If this disturbing state of affairs is allowed to drag on,

the quality of the Court Interpreters as a whole will unavoidably become lower which will certainly not be tolerated by all concerned unless we are prepared to undermine the importance of the Judiciary. We understand that the best translators in other countries, particularly in China, are those deployed to work in court. The administration in Hong Kong seems to have got the priority wrong. Little attention is given to the quality of interpreters in court. If the independent status of the Judiciary is to be maintained, particularly at a time when so much reliance is placed upon the

}