(1)When any evidence is given in a language, which any of the officers comprising the court, the Law Officer, the prosecutor, the accused or his defending officer or counsel does not understand, that evidence shall be interpreted to such officer or person in a language which he does understand and if an interpreter in such language has been appointed by the convening authority, and duly sworn or affirmed, the evidence shall be interpreted by him.(2)If no such interpreter has been appointed and sworn or affirmed, an impartial person be sworn or affirmed by the court as interpreter.(3)Before a person is sworn or affirmed as interpreter under this rule, the accused shall be informed of the person who is proposed to be sworn or affirmed, and may object to the person as not being impartial for any reasonable cause, and the court, if it thinks that the objection is reasonable, shall not swear or affirm that person as interpreter.(4)When documents are produced for the purpose of formal proof, it shall be in the discretion of the court to ensure as much to be interpreted as appears necessary.
