Incompetent translation could cost N. Korean teen his life

The Swedish government has denied the asylum claim of a teenager who claims to be a North Korean from North Hamgyeong Province. The denial is based on a report by a contractor, Sprakab, that failed to identify the teen’s dialect, or the places he named in his interview. A Korean expert hired by Sprakab now claims that the company misquoted her. An appeal is all that stands between the young man’s life and deportation to China, repatriation to North Korea, and almost certain death:

A Korean expert hired to assess the teenager’s dialect by a controversial Swedish linguistic company that evaluates asylum applications told journalists that his strong dialect had left her in no doubt that he came from North Korea.

The company, Sprakab, nevertheless concluded in its report that his dialect did not fit with his story of growing up in North Korea’s northern districts.

The woman, who has not been named, accused the company her of twisting her words in its report. “I never said that he didn’t come from North Korea,”she said. “What they are saying is wrong. It’s ridiculous.”

The teenager has appealed against the decision. “If I go back to North Korea then I will die,” he told Swedish radio.

His lawyer, Arido Dagavro, said he had proof that the places the teenager had mentioned did in fact exist, as well as testimony from other North Korean refugees that he had spoken with a recognisable dialect from North Hamgyong province in recorded interviews.

“It’s obvious that the migration board didn’t have the expertise required to take a decision in this matter,” Degavro said. [The Guardian]

I don’t know any of the facts beyond what’s reported here, but I certainly hope the Swedes aren’t too tone-deaf to what’s happening at the U.N. to deny this young man a carefully considered decision on appeal. If the translation company, Sprakab, screwed this case up, that calls for more training about the circumstances of North Korean refugees at a bare minimum. It may also call for a reevaluation of Sprakab’s contract, and an inquiry into whether Swedish officials pressured Sprakab to deny applications.

To a degree, the error is understandable. Every country considering asylum applications must deal with a large percentage of fraudulent claims—claims that ultimately disadvantage those with legitimate fears of persecution. Governments must learn to distinguish those cases by understanding the circumstances and languages of the claimants.

Hat tip to a reader.