Court-Registered Interpreters under Section 13 CPC

Interpretation of Section 13 of the Criminal Procedure Code:
The Status of “Court-Registered Interpreters” and the Safeguarding of the Accused’s Right to a Fair Trial

15 February 2026, Bangkok – This article analyzes the interpretation of Section 13 of the Criminal Procedure Code concerning the provision of interpreters for defendants who do not understand the Thai language. It looks into whether the law says that interpreters must be officially registered with the Court of Justice. Based on Supreme Court decisions, Section 13 mainly aims to protect the accused’s right to understand the legal process and defend themselves, rather than strictly requiring interpreters to be officially registered. The Court therefore retains discretion to assess the qualifications and suitability of interpreters on a case-by-case basis. Nevertheless, where interpretation deficiencies significantly impair the defendant’s right of defense, the proceedings may be rendered defective.

Keywords: court interpreters, Section 13 Criminal Procedure Code, defendants’ rights, fair trial, judicial discretion

The Right to a Fair Trial and Linguistic Assistance
The right to a fair trial constitutes a fundamental principle of criminal justice. A core component of this right is the defendant’s ability to understand both the charges and the proceedings in a meaningful and effective manner. In Thailand, Section 13 of the Criminal Procedure Code provides that where a defendant does not understand the Thai language, the court must arrange for an interpreter.

In practice, however, a recurring issue arises: must the interpreter necessarily be a person formally registered with the Thai Courts of Justice? This article examines Supreme Court reasoning and procedural principles in order to clarify the legislative intent of Section 13 and the scope of judicial discretion.

Legal Framework under Section 13 of the Criminal Procedure Code
Section 13 provides that if a defendant cannot understand Thai, the court shall arrange for an interpreter to ensure comprehension throughout the proceedings. This provision operates as a fundamental procedural safeguard rather than a purely technical rule.

A textual interpretation of the statute reveals that the interpreter is not explicitly required to be drawn exclusively from the official registry maintained by the Courts of Justice. The essence of the provision, therefore, lies in the interpreter’s competence, neutrality, and effectiveness, rather than in formal registration status.

Supreme Court Jurisprudence and Judicial Discretion
Supreme Court jurisprudence has established that Section 13 is a flexible formal requirement. If the facts show that the defendant knew the charges and could defend themselves properly, not having a registered interpreter doesn’t automatically make the case invalid.

Accordingly, courts retain discretion to evaluate interpreter qualifications on a case-by-case basis, taking into account:

• Linguistic competence
• Neutrality and reliability
• Accuracy and completeness in conveying substantive content

This approach reflects the broader procedural principle of substance over form in criminal adjudication.

The Court Interpreter Registry: A Professional Standard, Not a Legal Condition
In practice, the Thai Courts of Justice maintain a registry of court interpreters to facilitate case management and promote professional standards. While this system serves important administrative and quality-assurance functions, it does not constitute an absolute legal prerequisite for validity.

In other words, the failure to appoint an interpreter from the official registry does not, by itself, render the proceedings void provided that the defendant genuinely understood the essential substance of the case and was able to exercise procedural rights effectively.

However, if an interpreter is not skilled enough or if mistakes in translation seriously impact the defendant’s ability to defend themselves, these issues could compromise the fairness of the proceedings and might make them invalid.

Comparative and International Perspective
The protection of linguistic assistance rights is not unique to Thai law. It shows that there are global standards, like those in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which ensure that anyone accused of a crime has the right to a free interpreter if they don’t understand the language used in court (United Nations, 1966).

So, the way we understand Section 13 should focus on protecting basic rights instead of strictly following rules about how interpreters are registered.

Conclusion
Section 13 of the Criminal Procedure Code is designed primarily to safeguard the defendant’s right to understand and defend against criminal charges. It does not impose a fixed or mandatory requirement that interpreters must be formally registered with the Courts of Justice. Courts are empowered to decide whether an interpreter is qualified and appropriate based on their competence, neutrality, and the actual effect on the defendant’s rights.

While the use of registered court interpreters represents good practice and supports professional standards, it is not an absolute condition for legal validity. When the court adequately safeguards the defendant’s right to understanding and defense, the proceedings remain legal and equitable.

References

• Criminal Procedure Code (Thailand), Section 13.
• United Nations. (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. https://www.ohchr.org
• Supreme Court of Thailand. (1986). The Supreme Court of Thailand rendered judgments regarding the interpretation of Section 13 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 

This section provides information about Certified Translators, Translation Certifiers, and Certified Interpreters associated with SEAProTI.
The Southeast Asian Association of Professional Translators and Interpreters (SEAProTI) has officially shared the qualifications and requirements for becoming Certified Translators, Translation Certification Providers, and Certified Interpreters in Sections 9 and 10 of the Royal Gazette, which was published by the Prime Minister’s Office in Thailand on July 25, 2024.  Certified Translators, Translation Certification Providers, and Certified Interpreters
The Council of State has proposed the enactment of a Royal Decree, granting registered translators and recognised translation certifiers from professional associations or accredited language institutions the authority to provide legally valid translation certification (Letter to SEAProTI dated April 28, 2025)
SEAProTI is the first professional association in Thailand and Southeast Asia to implement a comprehensive certification system for translators, certifiers, and interpreters.
Head Office: Baan Ratchakru Building, No. 33, Room 402, Soi Phahonyothin 5, Phahonyothin Road, Phaya Thai District, Bangkok 10400, Thailand
Email: hello@seaproti.com | Tel.: (+66) 2-114-3128 (Office hours: Mon–Fri, 09:00–17:00)   

การตีความมาตรา 13 แห่งประมวลกฎหมายวิธีพิจารณาความอาญา: สถานะ “ล่ามขึ้นทะเบียนศาล” กับหลักประกันสิทธิในการต่อสู้คดีของจำเลย

• ความสามารถทางภาษา
• ความเป็นกลางและความน่าเชื่อถือ
• ความครบถ้วนและถูกต้องของการถ่ายทอดสาระสำคัญ

• ประมวลกฎหมายวิธีพิจารณาความอาญา มาตรา 13.
• United Nations. (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. https://www.ohchr.org
• ศาลฎีกา. (2529). คำพิพากษาศาลฎีกาที่เกี่ยวข้องกับการตีความมาตรา 13 แห่งประมวลกฎหมายวิธีพิจารณาความอา.