Rewriting the AUSIT Code of Ethics – principles, practice, dispute

Abstract

Codes of ethics in translating and interpreting have become increasingly examined in recent literature, as practitioners in ever-widening fields of practice see such codes as essential in underpinning their professionalism. While such codes in various professions set standards for their association’s membership, codes in some sectors of translating and interpreting often have a wider function, detailing ground rules and techniques for practice and serving as educational documents, for users of services as much as for practitioners. The code of ethics developed by the Australian Institute of Interpreters and Translators [AUSIT] has been often cited in international literature as a broad, comprehensive generic code for professional practice. When this code was recently rewritten by its association, the wider functions of the code, as well as core considerations of practitioners’ role, conduct and autonomy were extensively debated. This article examines the issues that arose in rewriting the AUSIT code, drawing on international comparisons of how other codes have defined their central tenets.

Ethics in translation practice

“…Facing the same global pressures and demands as the scholarly world, translation associations also began to advocate more actively for codes for their members from the year 2000 onwards. Codes have discussed in several scholarly papers (Ozolins, 2014a;Arrojo, 2012;Ko, 2006;Drugan, 2013, McDonough-Dolmaya, 2011Lambert, 2018), with substantially more academic output focusing on the role of codes for interpreters (Ozolins, 2016;Phelan, 2020;Ozolins, 2014b;Ozolins, Baxiauli-Olmos, 2017;Angelelli, 2006). The most recent contribution to the translator code (Baxiauli-Olmos, 2020) debate sought to reflect current scholarly thinking on codes, highlighting that papers either «touch on the topic in passing» or provide a «balanced descriptive view of the texts» (2020: 313).…”