Version
française
RM & T? RM for Record Management,
for translation T, T for transparency.
This contribution aims at promoting ,within institutions and international organizations working
with a multiplicity of languages, a
coherent chain of writing, translating and editing, a greater transparency and an
easier and more relevant access to documents. Based on the "Record
Management "(RM), the challenge is to better meet the needs of citizens
and businesses if possible in their language and their culture.
It is motivated by the need to raise the
value and constant use of public sector
information (Directive so-called "PSI") but also on finding a more
participative democracy through an intelligible access to the development
process of law, its evolution in time and context.
RM & T for translation
A good translation pre-supposes a good
knowledge of context but also an understandable source text . But the editors are
often prompted to write in a language other than their mother tongue. The use
of pre-existing fragments duly certified is likely to contribute to the quality
required for the source language.
Why then translate once again many
fragments that already exist and not simply re-use them after validation by the
translator?
This implies that we must give a quick and relevant access to the fragments'
fund to the editor as well as to the translator. That could be one of the
purposes of RM or a galaxy of RM linked together within the European Union
(EU).
The editors and translators are scattered in a multitude of institutions and
agencies but also in the outside world (experts, consultants, freelance
translators ...). These features should be freely available via the Internet
and inter-operable. They must rely on standards. The language resources having
been prepared, could then be used not only by the institutions and agencies of
the EU but also by exporting SMEs, NGOs, civil society ...
RM & T for Transparency According
to Regulation 1049/2001 but also to the
"PSI", inspired by the Anglo-Saxon law, records of documents have
been established in major EU institutions. These tools enable basic research
within any particular institution but no cross-research while the legislative
procedures involve the "Triangle
Commission-Parliament-Council." The classifications are not coordinated
between the three poles of legislative power. In addition, no link was established
with the work of national parliaments which are supposed t to integrate
European Union law into domestic law . In addition, many reports and studies
supporting these procedures are not registered in a consistent and complete
manner. Finally no thematic and targeted
notification procedure (by email and / or RSS) is so far available which does
not facilitate the monitoring, participation and re-use of "PSI" by civil
society. The EU legislation now in force
representsan achievement of some 10,000 documents available in all official
languages. Just like national law ,many
of these acts modify pre-existing texts. The knowledge of the law implies a
tedious and meticulous collation of historical changes. The EU does obviously
proceed to consolidating of existing texts but with a lot of delay. Again, the
use of a "RM" allows a consolidation of legal texts without delay.
The Canadian federal example is a tangible proof of such a service.
T as translation, T as transparency: a coordinated
implementation of RM is likely to facilitate reaching the objectives of public authorities, civil society and economic
operators in Europe.
Recent Comments