Language and Disadvantage before the Law: Expert Witnesses as Second Language Speakers in the Hong Kong Courtroom

Abstract

English remains to this day one of two official languages in which trials are conducted in the courts of Hong Kong. As the local population is predominantly Cantonese-speaking, in a trial heard in English, litigants appearing in court as witnesses and defendants mostly testify in Cantonese, assisted by an interpreter. However, expert witnesses, when asked in court about their language choice, usually elect to testify in English, which they speak only as a second language. They might find it more prestigious to testify in English or otherwise suffer a loss of face if, in their position as expert witnesses, they have to rely on the interpreter for interaction with the English-speaking legal professionals. This paper aims to illustrate the problems with expert witnesses testifying in English in the Hong Kong courtroom. It focuses on a murder case heard in the High Court of Hong Kong involving four expert witnesses including three medical doctors and one forensic pathologist. Except for a junior medical officer, who chooses to testify in Cantonese through an interpreter, the other three expert witnesses all testify in English. It is found that these expert witnesses, especially the two medical doctors, have a problem with both their comprehension of counsel’s questions and making themselves understood in English, and at times feign comprehension in an obvious attempt to avoid embarrassment. It is observed that these linguistically disadvantaged second language speakers in court are more suggestible and less assertive, which may arguably prove detrimental to the prosecution’s case. This paper also discusses another problem arising, i.e. the predominantly Cantonese-speaking jurors’ comprehension of the highly technical medical evidence, often made more confusing by the witnesses’ communication problems.