Recently, a major contract holder for police interpreting services in Spain found itself in the media spotlight when it was revealed that some of the interpreters it had been sending on police assignments had criminal records. While it’s usually a good idea for interpreters to have specialized knowledge of the areas in which they interpret, actual hands-on experience at committing crimes is probably not what the police had in mind when they drew up the contract. Instead of “time off for good behavior”, it looks like “bilingual behavior” will sometimes suffice.

The catalyst that enabled the public to learn about this situation was an everyday, routine event – some individuals needed language assistance at an airport, as their travel documents did not appear to be in order. In this case, the language required was Portuguese. Not such a difficult request, especially seeing as how it's spoken in the next country over.

So, imagine everyone’s surprise when the interpreter who arrived at the airport was neither Brazilian nor Portuguese, but Pakistani. That’s not to say he wasn’t qualified to interpret. He did, after all, have plenty of experience in the matter at hand – a prior criminal record with six different offenses, including one for forgery of documents. Did we mention there was a warrant out for his arrest?

Accordingly, the criminal – the "interpreter" – was arrested.

Just a few days later, another interpreter was called out by the police to the same airport in Barajas. He too, had a criminal record and was arrested at the scene.

So who’s to blame? Some would point the finger at Seprotec, the language services provider (LSP) that dispatched the interpreters under a €2.6 million contract. But, can Seprotec be held responsible?

The answer depends primarily on whether or not the contract required Seprotec to carry out criminal background checks, and whether or not there are any national, state, or local laws for government contractors regarding this matter.

This event isn't an anomaly. We know from our work around the world that these types of situations are not exactly uncommon. We recently heard of a case where a local police station asked bilingual inmates to come out of the cell to interpret for those who needed language assistance. And, we've written before about the problems that can arise when children interpret.

Professional ethics and standards for interpreters exist across the world, but the idea of "good behavior" for interpreters – that is, confidentiality, neutrality, disclosure of conflicts of interests, etc. – may still have a long way to go in contractual situations between government entities and LSPs, as this recent debacle demonstrates.