Stop demeaning PWDs!
Sep 21, 2006
SIR — I write in response to your article “PWD voters were misled, says expert†published on September 18.
SIR — I write in response to your article “PWD voters were misled, says expert†published on September 18.
While testifying during the election petition against the Electoral Commission and MPs for People With Disabilities (PWDs) one Paul Katisa who claims to be a Sign Language expert is reported to have informed court that the sign language experts deliberately distorted the messages to the deaf voters who participated in the February 17 election of PWDs MPs. First and foremost, the EC did not hire Sign Language experts but Sign Language Interpreters (SLI).Sign Language Interpretation is a profession. As a profession all qualified SLI are bound to abide by certain codes of conduct and ethics. One such codes is neutrality in the discharge of their services. By this, any qualified SLI is bound not to add or delete a single word from the messages. In other words, SLI are channels of transmission of messages
between the receiver and givers but not directly involved in the
communication process. They are hence only bound to bridge the communication gaps. SLIs’ duty is limited to only translating from spoken language to sign language and vice versa. so Paul katasi’s claims are not logical. Records available in the Uganda National Association of Sign Language Interpreters (UNASLI), a body that brings together all qualified SLI in Uganda, Uganda National Association of the Deaf (UNAD), the pioneer in training Sign Language since the ‘90s, do not have any member by the name Paul Katasi.So one wonders where on earth he became an expert in Uganda Sign Language noting that Sign Language differs from country to
country.
Katasi's testimony has three implications:
The view that SLI do not translate exact messages. lThe argument that deaf people’s access to Sign Language interpretation is useless.
Stigmatisation /demeaning deaf people and their language by implying that
they are unable to communicate effectively with interpreters.Katasi and his likes are not an authority on Sign Language and
therefore should desist from provoking deaf people and Sign Language users. If he wants authoritative information, let him go to Kyambogo University, which has a fully-fledged department specialising in Sign Language research and professional Sign Language Interpreters training.
He can also go to the Uganda National association of the Deaf (UNAD) that has a section on sign language work. By the way all work on Sign Language in Uganda was initiated by UNAD.
Joseph Mbulamwana Information Officer-UNAD
While testifying during the election petition against the Electoral Commission and MPs for People With Disabilities (PWDs) one Paul Katisa who claims to be a Sign Language expert is reported to have informed court that the sign language experts deliberately distorted the messages to the deaf voters who participated in the February 17 election of PWDs MPs. First and foremost, the EC did not hire Sign Language experts but Sign Language Interpreters (SLI).Sign Language Interpretation is a profession. As a profession all qualified SLI are bound to abide by certain codes of conduct and ethics. One such codes is neutrality in the discharge of their services. By this, any qualified SLI is bound not to add or delete a single word from the messages. In other words, SLI are channels of transmission of messages
between the receiver and givers but not directly involved in the
communication process. They are hence only bound to bridge the communication gaps. SLIs’ duty is limited to only translating from spoken language to sign language and vice versa. so Paul katasi’s claims are not logical. Records available in the Uganda National Association of Sign Language Interpreters (UNASLI), a body that brings together all qualified SLI in Uganda, Uganda National Association of the Deaf (UNAD), the pioneer in training Sign Language since the ‘90s, do not have any member by the name Paul Katasi.So one wonders where on earth he became an expert in Uganda Sign Language noting that Sign Language differs from country to
country.
Katasi's testimony has three implications:
The view that SLI do not translate exact messages. lThe argument that deaf people’s access to Sign Language interpretation is useless.
Stigmatisation /demeaning deaf people and their language by implying that
they are unable to communicate effectively with interpreters.Katasi and his likes are not an authority on Sign Language and
therefore should desist from provoking deaf people and Sign Language users. If he wants authoritative information, let him go to Kyambogo University, which has a fully-fledged department specialising in Sign Language research and professional Sign Language Interpreters training.
He can also go to the Uganda National association of the Deaf (UNAD) that has a section on sign language work. By the way all work on Sign Language in Uganda was initiated by UNAD.
Joseph Mbulamwana Information Officer-UNAD