Rosemary Okui Arocha has firsthand experience of how a single mistranslation can irreparably change someone’s life forever.
Her ordeal started on a chilly morning in mid-November 2021 in Matsusaka, Mie Prefecture.
Okui, 45, made breakfast for her son, who was 11 at the time, and opened the door of her apartment to go to work.
She found herself surrounded by a group of about 10 police officers.
Okui, who came to Japan at age 17 to support her family and worked as a dancer and a factory worker, was showered with unfamiliar words and accusations such as “stimulant” and “transfer for profit.”
She was arrested on suspicion of selling stimulant drugs to her acquaintance, although she had no idea of how she was tied to the allegations.
She was detained until just prior to her acquittal in March 2024.
When Okui claimed her innocence in an interrogation room at the prosecutors’ office, an interpreter sitting next to a prosecutor in front of her just seemed to have scoffed.
After the questioning session, the interpreter told her that the interrogation would be over sooner if she told the truth.
She felt as if the interpreter assumed she was guilty of the allegations.
MISTAKEN EVIDENCE
What was submitted as the “evidence” of the crime was a message sent to Okui‘s smartphone by her male acquaintance who had been arrested on suspicion of violating the Stimulants Control Law.
It read “Brad, may damo ka?” (“Brad, do you have any grass?”).
“Brad” is a slang for “brother,” mainly used to refer to a man.
The smartphone had been also used by Okui‘s roommate and his friend at the time.
But the Japanese translation of the word by investigators was “Aiko,” her nickname, when it should have been “kyodai” (brother).
As a result, she was identified as the recipient of the message.
According to a ruling by the Tsu District Court, the interpreter in charge of the translation asked the sender who “Brad” was. The man said it was “Aiko,” and the interpreter translated the word the way he replied.
The ruling said the original text must be translated accurately and faithfully, adding that “Brad” didn’t mean “Aiko.”
In addition, the court said Okui‘s smartphone had been mainly used by a man who was living with her at the time and his friend.
The man told the court that he received a drug from this friend.
The court acquitted Okui, saying that there was a possibility that the smartphone was used by other people.
Prosecutors decided to abandon the appeal.
After more than two years in detention, Okui‘s previously talkative son became reserved.
“Even though I was acquitted, I can’t return to my previous life,” she said. “I want judicial bodies to retain competent interpreters. That is because our lives depend on it.”
ENCOURAGING CONFESSIONS
Legal interpreters support investigative authorities, courts and attorneys.
Japanese and non-Japanese wanting to become one can apply for the position at a judicial body in each area and are registered following interviews and other procedures.
While they are essential in ensuring fair judicial proceedings, there are neither exams, qualifications or ethic rules standardized at the national level.
It has been suggested that each institution is short of providing sufficient training and education.
The number of foreigners living in Japan is close to 4 million as of the end of June 2025, nearly double the figure from the end of 2012.
They account for 3 percent of the total population, with the government intending to continue accepting them.
Nationwide, 9,900 registered interpreters in 110 languages are working with police forces, 5,500 interpreters in more than 20 languages with prosecutors and 3,244 interpreters in 61 languages with courts as of 2025.
The number of defendants who required interpreters in Japanese courts in 2023 was 3,851, an increase of 1,468 from 2014.
But the number of registered interpreters was 3,244 in 2025, a decrease of 596 from 2016.
“Legal interpreters lack an education,” said Christina Ito, 45, a legal interpreter who translates Tagalog to and from Japanese and took the stand as a witness at the request of Miwako Honjo, Okui‘s defense lawyer.
Ito, who started working as a police interpreter in mid-2000s, had also thought that it was her job to encourage defendants to “confess” in the first seven to eight years of her career.
“It wasn’t until I started studying interpreters’ ethics and law on my own when I understood that an interpreter is merely an interpreter,” she said.
PRIVATE EFFORTS
One day in late November last year, one room in a Tokyo community center was turned into an “interrogation room” where a “Vietnamese suspect” was held.
A lawyer playing the role of a police officer told a Vietnamese woman in her 40s aspiring to be a legal interpreter, “Interpreter, will you please persuade her? If she doesn’t admit it, she will be charged with a more severe crime.”
It was a scene from a certification exam offered by the Japan Law Interpreter Association, which was founded by legal interpreters and lawyers in 2009.
Persuading the client goes beyond the duties of an interpreter and violates the ethics code set by the association.
The objective was to see whether the candidate could refuse requests from police.
In other scenarios re-creating an attorney visit to the defendant and a trial, the Vietnamese woman was tested to see how she would refuse the suspect’s request to destroy evidence.
In addition, another scenario was if she could translate the defendant’s incoherent words the way they were said without explaining them in a simplified manner.
That is because it is unacceptable in court for an interpreter to add their own interpretations when every word is taken into account as evidence.
STAYING NEUTRAL AND FAIR
The organization was set up by Chinese legal interpreter Roman Amami, 65.
She developed the scenarios for the exam based on her own experiences in her 30-year career.
Amami was born in China in 1960.
During the Cultural Revolution, a social and political movement launched by Mao Zedong, she was falsely accused of criticizing the chairman and was forced to make a public apology for a crime without a trial when she was young.
That is all the more reason for Amami to set her personal feelings aside even when she has to deal with a defendant whom she deems to be unforgivable.
“The judge is the first one who decides whether the defendant is guilty or not,” she said. “The person’s life shouldn’t be changed because of the prejudgment of an interpreter.”
She gives lectures with lawyers 20 times a year to teach participants not only about neutrality, fairness, an eagerness to learn new terms and other ethical aspects required for the job, but also about legal expertise such as the meaning of “intent.”
That is because how the word is translated makes it clear what interpreters should be careful about.
For example, in a situation involving a victim hit by a glass, there is a difference between the glass being thrown at the victim by the suspect or being pushed away by the hand and landing on the victim.
The association conducts a proficiency test comprising writing and listening sections and another exam, and about 250 applicants have passed the tests.
The certification is still lesser known, but applicants can study beforehand what they need to know as legal interpreters through lectures on the law and ethics.
But there is a limit in what the private organization can do.
The association is often short of labor and funds, while it offers no lectures to teach interpreting skills.
“We think the central government should be involved in providing funds and implementing educational programs,” Amami said.
