4.11.1. Legislative and policy updates 

Countries undertook various actions to facilitate the provision of interpretation in the asylum procedure.

In terms of legislative changes, the Interpretation Act entered into force in Norway in January 2022. It follows from the Interpretation Act that when a public body is obligated to use an interpreter, a qualified interpreter must be used. The act also stipulates the requirement of professional conduct, including the duty of confidentiality, of interpreters.913 Public bodies must nominate one of the 2,000 qualified interpreters who can suggest improvements to the system.914

In Iceland, a reform was put forward on administrative procedures, including asylum, in order to provide professional interpretation to individuals who do not speak Icelandic.915

The new government in Sweden plans a reform to limit the right to a publicly-funded interpreter, in line with the minimum standards set by EU law.

Most countries use external services to secure interpreters and issue tenders. In 2022, OFPRA in France launched a tender procedure worth up to EUR 42 million for interpretation services, which expired in early September 2022.916 A similar tender in Greece resulted in a change of provider for interpretation at the national level, while due to contractual issues since September 2022, interpretation services were provided in a limited fashion, which according to ECRE led to delays in the registration of applications and interviews. As of February 2023, the contract for interpretation was awarded to METAdrasi.917

Finland also launched a new tender with no major changes on the requirements. In addition, it implemented a new reception model for beneficiaries of temporary protection which involves municipalities in the provision of reception services, including interpretation.

Videoconferencing and other means of remote interpretation are commonly used to ensure easier access and faster processing of cases. As of 2022, interpreters in Ireland are allowed to use videoconferencing during the first instance procedure rather than provide interpretation by telephone. Similarly, a new law on the acceleration of the appeal procedure and the asylum procedure introduced the possibility for Germany to provide interpretation through videoconferencing. The measure is intended to be particularly helpful for rare languages and situations when there is a regional shortage of interpreters. Germany also increased the pool of available interpreters.

The legislation on delegating interpretation to the Ministry of the Interior’s employees with C1 or C2 knowledge of a relevant language was criticised by civil society organisations in Bulgaria due to the lack of impartiality.918 This came against the general background of concerns being raised by civil society organisations about interpretation being provided in English, French and Arabic, and mainly in the reception centres in the capital Sofia. Interpreters from other key languages, such as Kurdish (Sorani or Pehlewani), Pashto, Urdu, Tamil, Ethiopian and Swahili, were scarce and largely unavailable.919

To address the arrival of displaced persons from Ukraine, several EU+ countries920 needed to increase the number of Ukrainian-iivand Russian921-speaking interpreters and produce more information material in those languages.

An area which is often unaddressed, interpretation for people with hearing impairments,922 was tackled in Austria, Bulgaria, Czechia, Hungary, Italy,923 Poland and Romania. They established cooperation mechanisms between local communities and international organisations. Both qualified and unqualified sign language interpreters were deployed to provide support to displaced persons with hearing impairments in Ukrainian, Russian and international sign languages during the first phases of reception to convey relevant information related to the host country924 and to facilitate access to services.925

The efforts made by EU+ countries and institutions triggered some criticism by civil society organisations, which reported a two-tier system for people fleeing Ukraine and applicants from other countries. They noted the ad hoc support services926 and initiativesiv which were quickly offered to Ukrainians.927 However, the unprecedented situation, which further emphasised the need for translated information during the international protection procedure, could foster an opportunity for national authorities to harmonise the level of interpretation services provided to all individuals seeking protection, irrespectively of the country of origin or habitual residence.