When Professional Ethics Conflicts With Moral Institutions

This essay is about the unusual step Professor Camayd-Freixas took of speaking publicly about his experience of having helped translate prosecutions of a huge number of illegal workers, who were arrested in the largest immigration raid of US history. Mr. Camayd-Freixas’ 14-page essay he distributed among other interpreters led to serious discussions as to whether it was appropriate for an interpreter to speak publicly about conversations with criminal defendants. In accordance with Cannon 6 (Restriction of Public Comment) of Iowa Court Rules’ Code of Professional Conduct for Court Interpreters and Translators, ‘’An interpreter must not publicly discuss, report, or offer an opinion …show more content…
And more importantly, he never went public while the cases were still in court. However, once the cases were settled, and because of the nature of the matter, for the first time in his life he felt compelled to speak out. Mr. Camayd-Freixas, a court interpreter who has been involved in hundreds of cases since 1985, was particularly mindful that he should refrain from making public comments concerning any particulars of a case wherein he has provided professional services; nonetheless, after having witnessed more than a few irregularities during court proceedings, (the defendants being fast-tracked under duress, the US attorney’s Office circumventing habeas corpus, etc) he decided not to turn a blind eye and wrote an essay, elaborating on the actual circumstances of fast-track proceedings. Ms. Kelly (2008) would later state, ‘’It’s quite unusual that a legal interpreter would go to this length of writing up an essay and taking a strong stance‘’ (para. …show more content…
To my view, the raid was clearly a fishing expedition. What Mr. Camayd-Freixas did, other than to inform and offer a matter-related opinion, was taking courage in both hands, and state what he believed to be fair. But for the moral stance he took, truth would have never come into light. Unfortunately, pointing and criticizing is easy as pie. But how many people would be willing to go this far, putting their lifetime’s career at stake for the sake of upholding their moral principles, for the sake of revealing the truth? We know that court interpreters help assure that defendants may have access to justice and that court proceedings function efficiently and effectively, but how can these be achieved if justice itself is absent? Sadly, we are living in a world so corrupt, in which politics rubs shoulders with corruption at every minute, that in the end we find it really hard to believe that justice will be done. I think, what we need in this world is more people as brave enough as Mr. Camayd-Freixas, willing to do what it takes to fight against lie, corruption, injustice. So, here the question is ‘does professional ethics outweigh truth and