Asylum Interpreting in Hungary: Insights from the Academic Literature (In Hungarian)

Abstract

The arrival of refugees fleeing the war in Ukraine has posed—and continues to pose—major challenges for both Hungary and the European Union. These challenges include language barriers, which have made the organization of interpreting services and interpreter training more important than ever. In response to these challenges, the European Union has adopted a new migration and asylum pact in 2024, aimed, among other goals, at ensuring a more uniform approach among
Member States. To this end, several asylum-related legal instruments that had previously been adopted in the form of directives were recast as regulations, thereby eliminating the need for transposition by Member States. For example, Regulation (EU) 2024/1348 laying down procedural rules for international protection is, from 12 June 2026, directly applicable in the Member States and makes it mandatory to provide either an interpreter or a cultural mediator during the personal interview of applicants for international protection. In light of these developments, it is worth reviewing both the international and Hungarian academic literature on asylum interpreting in order to identify possible shortcomings in the regulation by examining and comparing the content of the concepts used in interpreting studies, legislation, and legal practice. Such an analysis may also enable the formulation of proposals aimed at ensuring better protection of the rights of refugees, interpreters, and other participants in the procedure, as well as at enhancing the effectiveness of communication. Another objective of this study is to define asylum interpreting and situate it within the typology of interpreting, based on a review of the legal and Interpreting Studies literature, as well as the relevant legal
framework. Empirical research on asylum interpreting is discussed only insofar as it helps clarify legal and typological concepts and definitions.
The article first briefly outlines the most important international, European Union, and domestic rules applicable to persons granted or applying for international
protection, including the relevant provisions concerning the right to use one’s own language. The article then presents the literature on asylum interpreting and, on this basis, introduces a sui generis definition of asylum interpreting. Utilizing the multidimensional theoretical framework put forth by Pöchhacker (2004) and taking into consideration the refugee emergency situations mentioned by Todorova (2020) and the different roles required thereof, this definition can be summarized as follows: Asylum interpreting is a form of community interpreting provided to persons who have been granted or are seeking international protection. It takes place in various institutional settings (such as administrative authorities, immigration authorities, the police, courts, healthcare institutions, educational institutions, refugee camps, etc.) and may be carried out either on a voluntary basis (without remuneration) or in an official capacity (for payment), by trained, semi-trained or untrained interpreters or cultural mediators, either with both parties present or without the simultaneous presence of the parties.
A few questions may arise in relation to the definition, for there are borderline cases whose classification is difficult, such as interpreting at railway stations. Defining
a railway station as an institution may be contentious; however, railway stations also have an owner (in Hungary, typically the state), an operator, staff, etc., and therefore interpreting events taking place in these settings can also be classified under the above definition. This also has the advantage that the definition is sufficiently broad and flexible for the purposes of further empirical research, for example in the examination of phenomena belonging to the above-mentioned problem dimensions, or in situations involving shuttle interpreting as described by Todorova (2020), as well as in accommodating the role of the cultural mediator introduced in recent EU regulations. The inclusion of this latter role or profession should also be considered by the legislator upon establishing a national register for interpreters and by training institutions/academia.