25. ADDITIONAL WORKING LANGUAGES AT MEETINGS OF THE COMMISSION
(from "Chairman's Report of the Thirty-Fourth Annual Meeting")
The Commission received the Report of the Technical Committee Working Group on
Additional Working Languages which had met under the Chairmanship of Mr A.
Munoz-Seca (Spain).
This Group recognised the serious difficulties of delegations from non-English
speaking countries and most delegations supported in principle the use of
languages other than English within the IWC.
The Commission is one of the very few major Inter-governmental 0rganisations
which has only one working and official language.
It was suggested that there may be other ways of overcoming difficulties than
by the use of traditional interpretation systems.
The problems of non-English speakers are most acute in meetings of the
Scientific Committee where discussion is frequently rapid and less considered
than, for example, in meetings of the Commission.
The use of more formal procedures and/or simultaneous interpretation equipment
may require changes to meeting practices and more time for meetings.
Even the most optimistic cost estimate presented implied a heavy financial
commitment.
The Group agreed that it was unrealistic to think of introducing only one
additional language, except as a first step, to be followed by a number of
others in succession.
At present the Commission works at commendable speed and there was doubt that
this could be maintained if simultaneous translation were to be used.
The Working Group came to a series of conclusions and recommendations as
follows:
- (a)
- Having regard to the level of expenditure implied, the introduction of
additional languages should be postponed for the time being.
- (b)
- If, and when, at some future date, circumstances change and a decision
were taken to introduce additional working languages they should be introduced
on a step-by-step basis whereby the procedures for the introduction of the
first additional language included an obligation to adopt a firm timetable for
successive introduction of other languages.
- (c)
- Consideration should be given to ways of improving the conduct of meetings
so as to materially assist those delegates to whom English is not familiar.
In this context further consideration should be given to new and imaginative
approaches to the development of linguistic support within meetings such as
the provision of editorial assistance to non-English speaking delegations.
The Commission might establish a small working group to convene as necessary
to consider specific proposals.
The Working Group recorded that the Scientific Committee had contributed some
constructive comments and suggestions.
After discussion of the difficulties encountered by non-English speaking
scientists, the Working Group commended the following ideas for the Scientific
Committee to consider in determining its meeting practices:
- (a)
- all remarks should be addressed clearly and concisely through the Chairman
of the meetings.
This should facilitate comprehension of the discussion, help reduce rapid
exchanges between native English speakers which may be too fast for the other
delegates to follow and reduce the extent to which native English speakers
dominate the proceedings at present;
- (b)
- utmost care should be taken to ensure that last minute proposals and
amendments to reports are given full and deliberate consideration, for example,
by requiring them to be submitted in written form;
- (c)
- one day should be set aside to permit consideration of draft reports
before final review by the whole Committee.
The Chairman of the Scientific Committee indicated that it had already
established a Working Group under the Chairman-designate to consider
improvements in its working procedures and that this group would take full
account of the views expressed.
Mexico, on behalf of the Spanish-speaking countries, proposed that
consideration be given to contracting a group of two or three translators on
an experimental basis for the next meeting, and that the first additional
language to be used at the Commission should be Spanish.
The Federal Republic of Germany suggested that a one language system has some
advantages which should not be discounted and noted that the Commission's
procedures already allowed delegations to use their own interpreters.
France commented that it finds this system very satisfactory and Egypt
indicated its support for the German position.
Mexico and Spain expressed regret that the proposal did not find more support
but withdrew it in order not to prolong the debate.
Finally, the Commission endorsed the report of the Technical Committee Working
Group and commended all of the ideas suggested to improve communication within
the Commission.
_