This is a quick response that was sent yesterday to ATIO by one of our members. We will refute all the falacies of ATIO's press release in a more detailed letter that will be sent to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario soon. Point One: ATIO claims that “The Board of Directors of ATIO has made concerted efforts to respond to the concerns raised by a small number of Candidates who have now posted an online petition. Issues concerning the examination process have been brought to the attention of CTTIC, the Canadian Translators, Terminologists and Interpreters Council. CTTIC is responsible for preparing and marking the national standardized examinations. This is not under ATIO's purview. Our Answer: Claiming that “the concerns [were] raised by a small number” is a fallacy and an attempt to throw sand in the eyes of the beholder of your press release. The word “small” in particular aims to conjure images of a group of a disgruntled band that, in their desperate attempt to obtain ATIO’s coveted certification, are throwing fits and fists right, left and center. Nothing can be further from the truth. We, respectfully, and in our professional capacity, are asking our esteemed association to revisit our examination papers and mark them according to translation theory as the corrections made are riddled with errors and subjective and stylistic changes that, at best, mirror the markers’ ignorance of what they are doing. The response to our petition proved to us that ATIO’s credibility and practice of sweeping under the carpet its members’ complaints that are out forth to it exceeds the boundaries of the Arabic language and is a rampant practice in other languages too. Point Two: ATIO claims that “we have and will continue to consult with CTTIC regarding all concerns raised. CTTIC President, Ms. Golnaz Aliyarzadeh, C. Tran., C. Court Int., has clarified, 'Our Board of Examiners reviews exam texts, marking guidelines and procedures, and trains markers on an ongoing basis. [This is done] in order to ensure that the examination process remains fair and of the highest standards, ensuring the public is protected when they use the services of a Certified member of one of the provincial associations.' Our Answer: Claiming that ATIO “have and will continue to consult with CTTIC regarding all concerns raised” is not a very accurate description of what took place as a result of conveying to ATIO our precise list of grievances. It’s also, at best, too GENERAL of a statement. This matter has been going on for over a year now. What has ATIO done? Nothing. And we are only speaking about the collective complaint and not going back many years when we used to address ATIO individually. While taking pains to record our meeting with her in Toronto, ATIO president did not give us any specifics on her meeting with CITTIC with regards to our list of precise grievances. This brings us to the second ambiguous, if not fallacious, statement by CITTIC: “'Our Board of Examiners reviews exam texts, marking guidelines and procedures, and trains markers on an ongoing basis.” The response we got from CITTIC, as conveyed by ATIO to us, was very general in nature. If CITTIC, by its own admission, sends our exam papers to be corrected in the USA, how on earth do they train their markers and most importantly, control the integrity of these corrections? How do they verify the identity of the person sitting on the other end of the computer terminal? Point Three: ATIO claims that “Both ATIO and CTTIC offer several options to clarify and address candidate examination concerns. These include the following measures: to appeal examinations and have a third-party review, to take an examination preparatory course or pursue certification via the long-established On Dossier process instead of the examination.” Our Answer: This claim is so trite it is laughable. It only shows ATIO’s nonchalance that borders on lethargy. Did you go back and check your records to find the many appeals many of us have lodged, the numerous preparatory exams many of us have took, and the on-certification applications we have made? Point Four: ATIO claims that “Unfortunately, Candidates do not always avail themselves of those options. It is disappointing that these Candidates have instead chosen to file a petition calling for the abolition of ATIO and/or unspecified ‘reforms’ to replace the standards and processes that ensure public confidence in the quality of our members’ work.” Our Answer: The claim that “Candidates do not always avail themselves of those options” is a downright and stark fallacy that the numerous exam results documentation in our possession which contains the “remarks” of ATIO’s genius markers would refute in a jiffy. If ATIO wants to blindfold itself and persist in regurgitating the phrase “ensure public confidence in the quality of our members’ work,” this only goes to showcase the practice of spearheading a crumbling organization that is adamant on defending the status quo while mechanically repeating an infinitesimal part of a sentence in its by-laws. In conclusion, once again, we urge ATIO to take the time not in putting forth defensive press releases that only enhances our image of this association’s ineptness, but to seriously examine and investigate our list of grievances in a scientific and systematic manner that guarantees justice for all parties concerned.