Page 311 - Handbooks of Applied Linguistics Communication Competence Language and Communication Problems Practical Solutions

Understanding Aboriginal silence in legal contexts 289

of the Queensland Criminal Justice Commission (CJC). This hearing was part of
an investigation of an allegation of police misconduct, and I was asked to appear
as an expert witness. In addition to explaining some of the subtle ways in which
communication patterns differ between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal speak-
ers of English, I was asked to advise the Commission specifically on more
effective ways of hearing the evidence of Aboriginal witnesses to this tribunal.
As part of this process, I listened to an Aboriginal woman being questioned by
lawyers. This woman had originally approached the Commission wanting to tell
her story (related to her witnessing of police misconduct in the matter under
investigation), and no disadvantage could occur to her as a result of her evi-
dence. However, under questioning by the lawyers, she provided very little in-
formation. The lawyers asked her questions, and she appeared unable to provide
answers. I was then asked to advise the Commission about communication with
this witness, in her absence. I recommended that the lawyers should wait after
each question, until the witness answered. I explained that this means asking a
question and then ‘shutting up’. Given the uncomfortable feeling that this leaves
with many (non-Aboriginal) people, I suggested that the interviewing lawyer
could shuffle papers, or say something like ‘there’s no need to rush’. In answer
to the Commission’s question about ‘how long should we wait?’ I replied, ‘until
after the answer’.
Following a short adjournment, the witness was asked to return to the wit-
ness stand, and this revised style of questioning took place, with remarkable
results. The same witness who had earlier that day appeared shy, difficult to
communicate with, and of little help to the Commission’s investigation, was
now an articulate witness with a clear and important story to tell the Commis-
sion. The only significant change was that the interviewing lawyers allowed
time for the silence which began quite a few of her answers to their questions.

4. Intercultural awareness is not enough

Experiences such as this CJC hearing, as well as Robyn Kina’s case, seem to
highlight the importance of intercultural awareness for legal professionals. An
understanding of the possibility of different ways of using the same language, as
well as specific details, appears to have the potential to lead to much more
effective intercultural communication. This approach is consistent with much
sociolinguistic work on intercultural communication, and can be called a ‘dif-
ference’ approach to linguistic and cultural diversity (see Pennycook 2001;
Rampton 2001). This difference approach ‘emphasizes the integrity and auton-
omy of the language and culture of subordinate groups, and the need for insti-
tutions to be hospitable to diversity’ (Rampton 2001: 261). Thus in both the
general lawyers’ handbook and the specific example of the CJC hearing, differ-