Dominique Guesdon v. France
25 July 1990
Communication No. 219/1986, U. N. Doc.
CCPR/C/39/D/219/1986 (1990)
The author is a Breton and his mother tongue is Breton although he also speaks French. He appeared in court charged with defacing public property after road signs were painted over to show the design of some Bretons for signs to be bilingual. During the court proceedings he requested that he and 12 witnesses be permitted to give their testimony in Breton through an interpreter. The Human Rights Committee sought clarification from him that he and the witnesses were able to understand and speak French. The reply came from the author that they could. The Committee ruled that there was no violation of Article 14, stating that a state's use of one official court language does not violate the Article. Nor does the requirement of a fair trial require the state to make interpretation available if a citizen's mother tongue differs from the official language. The requirement for interpretation is only if the accused or witnesses have difficulty in understanding or making themselves understood in the official language.