Policy and practice in South African courtrooms: A case study of Khelovedu language use and the perceptions of interpreters

Abstract

This article examines dialect use in South African courtrooms, focusing on Khelovedu, a non-standard variant of Sepedi spoken in Limpopo’s Mopani District. Framed by social justice theory and South Africa’s multilingual legal framework (Constitution, sections 6 and 35(3)(k); Use of Official Languages Act), this study explored the use of Khelovedu in court, interpreters’ and magistrates’ perceptions and associated challenges. Semi-structured interviews with interpreters from two regional courts were analysed through content analysis with member checking. Findings show that interpreters often used Khelovedu at the request of Balovedu participants to enhance comprehension, engagement and fair-trial rights. While this use improved inclusiveness and efficiency, systemic barriers such as a lack of orthography, a limited legal terminology, euphemisms and the absence of formal training undermined accuracy.
Contribution: These findings highlight a disconnect between policy and practice: although laws and policies support multilingualism, they largely overlook dialects, forcing frontline actors to improvise, which may pose forensic risks. We recommend recognising regionally important dialects in justice-sector policies, implementing dialect-sensitive training with accreditation and developing a collaborative Khelovedu–Sepedi–English legal glossary. Additional measures include pre-hearing terminology discussions, secure digital reference tools with expert support, and quality assurance mechanisms such as clarification events and appeals to strengthen interpretation accuracy.