ROLE CONFLICT BETWEEN INTERPRETING AND MEDIATION IN NORMATIVE DOCUMENTS IN RUSSIAN, UZBEK AND ENGLISH

Abstract

The article examines how normative documents in English, Russian and Uzbek define the role of the interpreter and the role of the mediator, and where these roles converge or conflict. The material comprises six documents, namely the Code of Ethics of the National Association of Judiciary Interpreters and Translators, the Conflict Zone Field Guide of AIIC, FIT and Red T, Directive 2010/64/EU, Article 59 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the provisions on the interpreter in the Criminal Procedure Code of Uzbekistan and the Law of Uzbekistan «On Mediation». Ten role parameters were compared. Confidentiality is the only parameter present in all documents with substantive provisions. Accuracy is required of the interpreter, while impartiality is prescribed both to interpreters and to the mediator. The professional codes forbid the interpreter to give advice or act as an advocate, which is precisely the active function of the mediator. The Uzbek law on mediation regulates the language of the procedure but never mentions the interpreter. Russian and Uzbek also lack the lexical distinction between interpreter and translator. Recommendations on terminology and on the status of the interpreter in mediation are proposed.