Linguistic inequality in South African courtrooms: A Constitutional analysis of Interpretation barriers and access to justice

This paper conducts a rigorous constitutional law analysis of the systemic failure to realise language rights within South African courtrooms, three decades into the democratic dispensation. It posits that the persistent dominance of English and the chronic inadequacy of interpreting services constitute a prima facie breach of the state’s positive and immediate obligations under Sections 6, 7(2), 9, 10, 30, 31, and 35(3)(k) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. Through a doctrinal analysis of pivotal jurisprudence from the Constitutional Court and superior courts, the paper demonstrated how judicial tolerance of substandard interpreting services violates the inviolable right to a fair trial and fundamentally undermines the foundational constitutional value of equitable multilingualism. It argued that this failure represents a form of unconstitutional systemic under-enforcement, which perpetuates colonial-era linguistic hierarchies and denies substantive justice and equal protection under the law to most citizens. By applying core constitutional law principles, including transformative constitutionalism, the doctrine of objective normative value, and the test for reasonableness in fulfilling positive state duties, the paper constructs a normative framework for assessing the state’s compliance. The paper contributes to the scholarship by proposing targeted, constitutionally mandated reforms, asserting that the realisation of linguistic justice is a non-negotiable component of the state’s duty to respect, protect, promote and fulfil the Bill of Rights, and is essential for the decolonisation and legitimacy of the post-apartheid legal order.