SLMC clarifies language policy

[Corrections and Clarification]

The SLMC registrar has sent us the following clarification with regard to a news item on the front page of the Daily News of 2009 16 July captioned "SLMC ignores official language policy": "It is usual for the SLMC to request doctors submitting marriage certificates in Tamil to submit a certified English translation.

The SLMC maintains its records in English. In the case of doctors, the SLMC is called upon to write to various international organisations, hospitals and medical schools and to local organisations such as the Postgraduate Institute of Medicine (PGIM) which maintain records in English. Most doctors who receive specialist training at the PGIM have to spend one year in a recognised centre overseas. All correspondence with these countries is in English. It is important that there is consistency in the spelling of the names used in all documents submitted to overseas institutes.

This is the reason why the SLMC requests an official English translation when certificates are submitted in a language other than English in order to avoid future problems that arise as a result of variations in the English spelling of names.

In instances where names are not clear for the purpose of translation, we request official translations of certificates written in Sinhala as well.

When the doctor submits the translation, it is assumed that he/she has checked the accuracy of names in the translated documents. It is relevant to mention that in the case other categories of health care workers, the SLMC accepts Tamil certificates as they do not usually require certification for international purposes.

So, the basis of our procedure is certainly not “ignorance, foolishness or something else”(innuendo noted ) as alleged in the article. but for reasonable reasons in the interest of the doctors. If a member of the public thinks that procedure should be changed, there are ways of suggesting in a constructive way. Preliminary inquiry has not revealed evidence that the doctor concerned had protested nor that anyone at the SLMC had “vehemently rejected” his appeal.

However we await the doctor’s statement to us. If there was an altercation with the subject clerk, the doctor had only to speak to one of the Registrars or to the President of the SLMC. This he did not do. The English Translation that the doctor submitted had the translation date as 6th April 2009, from the Registrar General’s office, Battaramulla and not from Dehiwala as stated in the news report.

So it is unlikely as reported, that he had got the translation done on that day. It is more likely that he had the official English translation with him but had not brought it to the SLMC when he came there on the 14 July 2009.

We regret that Dr Michael Fernando did not think fit to ask for the SLMC side of this story before publishing a sensationalised prejudicial report.