Services for the public

Wisconsin Court Interpreter Program–Disciplinary policy and complaint procedure

The opportunity to provide interpreter services to the courts under the direction of the Director of State Courts office is at the Director's complete and continuing discretion because of the critical reliance the courts must have on the skills, performance, and integrity of the interpreter in performing duties for the court. This discretion applies to any person who is registered with the Court Interpreter Program (CIP).

Possible reasons for discipline

Complaints may be filed against interpreters who are registered with the CIP and who are actively working in the Wisconsin court system. Possible reasons for discipline include:

(a) Violation of the Code of Ethics for Court Interpreters
(b) Conviction of any felony or misdemeanor; in particular, crimes involving moral turpitude, fraud, corruption, dishonesty, misrepresentation, or false statements
(c) False or deceptive advertising after receipt of notification to discontinue
(d) Knowing and willful disclosure of confidential or privileged information obtained while serving in an official capacity
(e) Gross incompetence
(f) Non-compliance with the program's policies and procedures
(g) Incapacity to perform the duties of a court interpreter which may include but is not limited to medical incapacity or incarceration
(h) Engaging in action that calls into question the interpreter's ability to work effectively in court

Complaint procedure

Any person may initiate a complaint against an interpreter by filing it with a judge, clerk of court, District Court Administrator (DCA), or CIP. All complaints must be in writing, must be signed, and must describe the alleged inappropriate conduct. Within twenty (20) business days of receipt of a complaint, the CIP manager will commence review of the complaint to assess its merit.

If the CIP manager determines the complaint is insufficient or the Director does not have jurisdiction to review the complaint, the CIP manager will send a written notice informing the complainant that no further action will be taken. The interpreter will not receive a copy of the complaint.

If referral to the Sub-Committee is required, the interpreter will be provided with a cover letter and a copy of the complaint with any supporting documentation. Any response to the allegation must be received by the CIP within twenty (20) business days of the date listed on the cover letter.

Upon receipt of the interpreter's response, the CIP manager will forward the complaint, response, and any supporting documentation to the Sub-Committee. Members of the Sub-Committee may consider information obtained from sources other than the complaint and response. If the complaint is found to have no merit, the complaint shall be dismissed and the complainant and interpreter shall be notified in writing that no further disciplinary action will take place.

If it is determined by the Sub-Committee that an ethical violation probably occurred, or if no response is filed by the interpreter, members of the Sub-Committee may determine what further action is required. The Sub-Committee may set a hearing to review the complaint, or review the matter by considering all information as submitted. If no hearing is set, the Sub-Committee will issue a recommendation to the Director as to a possible disposition and proposed sanctions, if any.

If a hearing is set, the interpreter shall be notified by mail of the time and date of the hearing, which shall be set no later than twenty (20) business days after a determination that probable cause exists. The interpreter shall receive a copy of any additional materials the Sub-Committee may have considered in making a determination that an ethical violation probably occurred.

While a disciplinary proceeding is pending, the Director may suspend the interpreter's certification or appearance on the roster if it appears the interpreter's continued practice as an interpreter poses a substantial threat or harm to the public or to the integrity of the court system.

While it is not necessary to use this specific format, a grievance form is available for your convenience:
Grievance form : English | Spanish | Hmong

Informal resolution

Efforts to resolve the complaint informally may be initiated by the interpreter and the complainant at any time. Any resolution reached must be submitted in writing to the sub-committee for approval. Upon approval of any resolution reached informally, or subsequent to any review without a hearing, the sub-committee will notify the complainant and the interpreter of its written approval of the informal resolution.

Voluntary resignation by the interpreter

An interpreter who desires not to contest or defend himself/herself against an allegation of unethical conduct may at any time voluntarily resign his or her certification in lieu of further disciplinary proceedings. The allegations against the interpreter are presumed to have been proven for purposes of considering reinstatement.

Hearings

All hearings will be recorded and shall be private and confidential. The sub-committee may, in its discretion, call witnesses, consider or clarify any evidence presented, giving such evidence the weight it deems appropriate. The interpreter may be represented by counsel, and shall be able to testify, comment on the allegations, and call witnesses. All testimony taken shall be under oath.

Recommendation by the Sub-Committee to the Director

Within thirty (30) days of the hearing, the Sub-Committee will issue a recommendation to the Director as to a possible disposition and proposed sanctions if members find the interpreter committed any of the actions described in previous section.

Final determination by the Director

Upon receipt and review of the sub-committee's recommendation, the Director will issue a final determination as to whether the interpreter committed any of the actions described in previous section. A written letter shall be sent to the interpreter with the decision and proposed sanctions if applicable along with all supporting material the sub-committee or the Director may have considered in making their decision. The complainant will receive a copy of the decision letter.

Possible sanctions

Possible sanctions the sub-committee and the Director may consider include but are not limited to one or more of the following:

1. Private or public reprimand (see Notification to the Courts)
2. Imposition of costs and expenses incurred by the sub-committee related to the proceeding
3. Restitution
4. A requirement that specified education courses be taken
5. A requirement that one or more parts of the oral certification examination be retaken
6. A modification of or suspension from the list of interpreters eligible to work in court
7. A requirement that work be supervised or monitored over a period of time
8. A suspension of certification for a specified period of time
9. Permanent revocation of certification
10. A refusal to confer certification to a non-certified interpreter for a specified period of time or under certain circumstances, permanently
11. Denial of state reimbursement to county or counties where interpreter's services are used for a specified period of time or under certain circumstances, permanently
12. Notice to the affected court for possible contempt action
13. Referral to law enforcement or district attorney for prosecution where appropriate

The specific disciplinary action and the degree of discipline to be imposed should depend upon factors such as the seriousness of the violation, the effect of the improper activity on others or on the judicial system and the existence of aggravating or mitigating factors.

Aggravating factors may include prior disciplinary action against the same interpreter; experience as an interpreter; intentional, premeditated, knowing, grossly incompetent or grossly negligent act; bad faith or obstruction; a pattern of misconduct, multiple offenses; failure to cooperate during disciplinary proceeding; refusal to acknowledge conduct; vulnerability of victim; or illegality of conduct.

Mitigating factors may include absence of prior disciplinary action; good faith effort to rectify consequences of misconduct; nature of conduct and likelihood of reoccurrence; isolation of event; experience as an interpreter; implementation of remedial measures to mitigate harm or risk of harm; self-reporting; voluntary admission of violation; or temporary circumstances outside of interpreter's control.

Reinstatement by the Director

A court interpreter whose certification or roster status has been suspended or revoked may apply in writing to the Director for reinstatement pursuant to any timeframes established in the final decision. This request shall explain why the applicant believes reinstatement should occur. The Director shall have the sole discretion whether to grant or deny reinstatement or to impose conditions upon reinstatement as deemed appropriate.

Notification to the courts

If an interpreter has been disciplined for an ethical violation, the CIP manager may notify all clerks of circuit court and District Court Administrators of the results. The CIP manager may also notify municipal courts, federal courts or any other agency deemed appropriate by the Director of the results.

Duty to self-report

An interpreter who has been sanctioned for discipline by the Director has a duty to report the disciplinary outcome within 30 days of the imposition of the sanctions to all other jurisdictions where the interpreter's certification may be recognized. Failure to self-report may be considered by the Director when determining if reinstatement is appropriate.

*Under CIP Program Policies Sec. 13.2 the Character and Fitness Sub-Committee (the Sub-Committee) is a permanent sub-committee consisting of three (3) rotating members of the Committee to Improve Interpreting and Translation in the Wisconsin Courts. The composition of the Sub-Committee at all times will include at least one judge. The Sub-Committee's charge is to consider all relevant information presented and to make a recommendation to the Director as to whether the interpreter's character and fitness are sufficient to ensure the integrity and competence of interpreting services and the maintenance of high standards in the administration of justice.