Q & A

In everyday parlance "translating" and "interpreting" are often taken as having equivalent meanings.
In the professional community "translating" and "interpreting" differ in meaning, being mutually exclusive.

Stereotypically, a translator takes a previously-written text written in one language and, in their own time, produces a matching text, of equivalent meaning, in a second language. This would then be available to be read sometime later. Often the reader of the translated text never meets the translator. Hallmarks are the presence of a 'written text' that is converted by the translator 'in isolation', converting language in one direction only.
Stereotypically, an interpreter listens to speech spoken by some person in one language, and then coveys that orally in a second language to another person; the second person will then respond orally in their language, which the interpreter will then convert into the first language for the benefit of the other interlocutor. Generally the interpreter is present in the company of the interlocutors. Hallmarks are the presence of a 'spoken conversation' that is converted by the translator 'in person', converting language in both directions.

More complicated translation scenarios

Another activity that could be called translation would be subtitling of a movie. Although the script is spoken by the actors, the distinction is that the movie is pre-recorded, and the translator would work on producing the (written) subtitles 'offline'. The hallmarks are that the work is done 'offline' on a 'pre-recorded' source, converting language in one direction only.

More complicated interpreting scenarios

Interpreting can be done consecutively (the interpreter waits for the person to finish their sentence(s)) or simultaneously (the interpreter talks over the top of the speaker, with a lag of a few seconds). Interpreting also encompasses non-spoken forms of communication, most notably sign language (in Australian known as Auslan). Hypothetically it could occur that a person — say in hospital — is able to communicate only by writing: if the hospital staff need to communicate 'live' with them in another language, that would arguably also correspond to a form of interpreting, even though reading and writing would be involved. Hallmarks are that the work is done 'on the spot', converting language in both directions.
Division One Academic and Language Services offers translation services; it does not offer interpreting services.

Can you translate my mediocre English into good English?

Strictly speaking, this does not qualify as a form of "translation". It would be called something like "proof-reading", "copy-editing" or "language editing" — which are services offered by Division One Academic and Language Services.

Can you "certify" my document?

This depends what you mean.

Option 1: certify a copy of the original source document

No. Translators are generally not legally allowed to certify copies as being 'true copies' of an original document. You need someone like a JP or a Notary.

Option 2: certify the original source document

No. Translators are generally not legally allowed to certify original documents as being authentic (with the possible exception of documents which they themselves produce). You need someone like an officer of the university or government agency that issued the original document.

Option 3: certify the translation

Although there are some guidelines on how professional translators should provide written assurances on the veracity and precision of the translation (as required by DFAT for certain documents, but recommended by NAATI for general adoption), it is not really very helpful to call this 'certification' of the translation, due to the risk of confusion with the certification of copies described above.

Sometimes it is also suggested (or 'required') that translation was performed by a "NAATI-certified" translator. However, it would be more accurate to express the status of the translator as either "NAATI-accredited" or "NAATI-recognised".

In the exceptional circumstances where the translation is to be used in court proceedings, an affidavit may need to be made ^{[WA Family Court] [Australian Family Court]}.

There is no standard phrase used to indicate veracity and precision of the translation. Examples include:
"Attached [...] is an accurate translation of that [document] into the English language prepared by me." (representation made by the Translator) ^{[Australian Family Court]}
"true and correct copy" ^{[ATO, Copies of documents]}
"true and correct translation" (representation made by a Member of Parliament) ^{[Queensland Parliament, Rules]}

How can I get copies certified?

In Australia

Usual practice is to approach a Justice of the Peace (JP), police officer, or pharmacist — or an authority of 'equivalent' standing — with both the 'original' and the photocopy thereof. Below, such a person is referred to as a "certifier".

However, there seem to be no legal directives (Acts or Regulations) that generally prescribe either who may certify a copy, or the format (including wording) of such certification ^{[WA Dept. of the Attorney General, Info. Fact Sheet 3]}. Thus, in principle, it would be legal for anybody to certify a copy using any wording in any format; for example, there seems to be no impediment for you to 'certify' your own copies by scrawling in crayon, "This copy is fair dinkum."
Although there may be no general legal limitations on who can perform certification or how it can be done, there are also no apparent requirements on any particular form of certification to be accepted. Therefore the above self-certification may not be accepted by the recipient.

Formally, the requirements are dictated by the intended recipient. It is conventional for the intended recipient to specify that the copies must be certified by anyone who is legally permitted to witness a Statutory Declaration ^{[DET, Guidelines for the certification of documents] [WA Dept. of the Attorney General, Info. Fact Sheet 3]}. This category of persons is restricted by the law to JP's, etc., as listed in Schedule 2 of the Statutory Declarations Regulations (1993). In summary, as of September 2016 this encompasses: Various legal professionals; Various medical professionals; Various court officials ; Various law-enforcement officers; Members or Fellows of certain Australian professional societies/associations; Certain agents and employees of Australia Post; Australian Consular Officer or Australian Diplomatic Officer; Commissioner for Affidavits; Commissioner for Declarations; Certain authorised employees of the Australian Trade and Investment Commission or the Commonwealth located outside Australia; Holder of a statutory office; Justice of the Peace; Marriage celebrant (registered); Certain members of the Australian Defence Force; Member of Australian parliament or local council; Minister of religion (registered); Notary public; Person authorised by Australian State or Territory law; Senior Executive Service employee of an Australian government authority; Teacher (full‑time); Provided that they have 5 or more continuous years of service: (a) Bank officer, (b) Building society officer, (c) Credit union officer, (d) Finance company officer, (e) Permanent employee of an Australian government authority.

Forms of certification

Notwithstanding the above comments, some authorities advise that the certification should be given as,
"I certify this to be a true and accurate copy of the document reported to me to be the original document",
or wording of substantially the same effect, added to the copy by handwriting in ink or with an inked stamp ^{[NSW JP Handbook 2013, page 39]}.

Other recommended wording includes:
"I certify that this is a true copy of the document produced to me on [date]." ^{[DET, Guidelines for the certification of documents] [WA Dept. of the Attorney General, Info. Fact Sheet 3]}
"This is a true copy of the document presented to me." ^{[Australian Consulate-General (Hong Kong)]}

Actual wording I have seen used by certifiers:
"I certify this to be a true copy of the document shown and reported to me as the original. Dated [date]." (stamped) [NSW J.P.]
"I certify that this document is a true copy of the original having been sighted by me this day [date]." (stamped) [Victorian J.P.]
"I hereby certify that this is a true copy of the original." (handwritten) [Pharmacist]

Differences allowed between the 'original' and the copy

It is not required that the copy have the same 'quality' as the document from which the copy was made, in particular ^{[cf. NSW JP Handbook 2013, page 38]}:

the type of paper may be different (thus watermarks and other such hallmarks or security features may be different or missing);
the printing resolution may be lower;
the range of colours may be smaller (or the copy may be in greyscale, or "black-and-white");
the size may be different (although the scaling should be uniform throughout the copy); and
lamination may be present only on the 'original' (or only on the copy).

Copies of copies; copies of edited/annotated documents; copies of portions of a document

It is also important to understand that certification of copies does not formally imply anything about the status of the document that has been copied ^{[cf. NSW JP Handbook 2013, pages 36 & 89] [WA Dept. of the Attorney General, Info. Fact Sheet 3]}. Although it is common to refer to the document that has been copied as the "original", by law it may be a facsimile of the original, it may be a modification of the original, and it may be only a portion of the original (e.g. only some pages). However, some authorities have issued guidelines stating that the document that has been copied must actually be an "original" in the sense that it was "made directly by the author or issuer of the document" ^{[e.g. NSW JP Handbook 2013, page 89]}. (The intended interpretation of this would be that the document should have been directly issued by the authority represented as having issued it according to the text of the document itself.)

Copies of electronic documents

As it seems there is no legal restriction on the nature of the 'original' document (to be copied), therefore documents in electronic format are eligible to be copied and for such copies to be then certified. However, the copies would conventionally be reproductions made on paper (not electronic copies), with the certification made 'in writing' with a pen and/or an inked stamp ^{[cf. NSW JP Handbook 2013, pages 89–90]}.

Again there is no legal restriction on the nature of the electronic document. However, guidelines have been issued by some authorities stating that the electronic document should likewise have been made by the author or issuer of the document. This can be assured through the certifier accessing the 'official website' of the author or issuer of the document (or a computer under their control) and either printing the document from that website/computer, or else comparing the printout/copy provided by the requester with the document viewed on that website/computer ^{[cf. NSW JP Handbook 2013, pages 37–38]}.

Copies of documents in a language other than English (LOTE)

It is generally advised that copies should not be certified unless the certifier is readily able to distinguish differences between the copy and the document that was copied, and it is generally recognised that this is not practical unless the document is written in a language that the certifier has at least a moderate level of fluency in. This may seem to present a difficulty when attempting to certify a copy written in a LOTE; however, there is a quite straightforward solution to this issue.

By making the copy (usually a photocopy) in the presence of the certifier, the certifier can be assured that the copy is a 'true' copy ^{[NSW JP Handbook 2013, page 37] [WA Dept. of the Attorney General, Info. Fact Sheet 3]}.

Copies of other people's documents

I have encountered the situation where a certifier requested (or, demanded) photo-identification (e.g. a passport or driver's licence) to confirm that the documents (e.g. testamurs) belong to the person presenting them for certification. This appears to be purely a policy or philosophy of that individual certifier. In principle, there is no restriction on certifying copies of documents relating to your family, your friends, your staff, or complete strangers. In case the subject of the documents cannot conveniently attend to request certification, the simplest alternative would be to find somebody else to certify the documents.

Copying of legal documents

In some cases copying of legal documents may require special accreditation or practices.

Copies or scans of certified copies

A copy or a scan of a certified copy has no standing as a certified document. Although in principle a copy (but not a scan) of a certified copy could reasonably in turn be certified, you may find certifiers decline to perform such certification, following recommendations from some authorities ^{[NSW JP Handbook 2013, page 37]}.

Some institutions are requesting applicants obtain certified copies of their original documents, and then scan the certified copies to obtain electronic representations of the certified copies (typically in PDF format) ^{[e.g. ACS Skills Assessment Guidelines for Applicants 2015, page 2]}.
Such institutions should ask themselves why they don't instead ask applicants to scan the original documents. Original documents are generally considered to carry more weight than copies of any kind. The main reason that certified copies are made is that it is often inconvenient or impractical to provide the original document to the recipient ^{[NSW JP Handbook 2013, page 36]}. However, if electronic scans are acceptable to the recipient institution, then there is less reason to require certified copies be made.

The main advantage of continuing of requesting a scan of a certified copy, rather than a scan of the original, is that in the process of obtaining a certified copy the certifier might consider whether the document represented as an 'original' does indeed bear hallmarks such as a watermark or handwritten signature (not a printed signature made from an electronic image) that assure the document's provenance, but which may be either imperceptible or indistinguishable in an electronic scan.
However, as mentioned above, the certifier is not legally obliged to consider such aspects, and the subsequent electronic scan is merely represented as being genuine by the applicant — it is not directly issued by the certifier.

Alternatives to certified copies

Besides the options of providing an original instead of a copy, or electronically transmitting a scan of the original, another alternative would be for the the respondent to make a statutory declaration (a "stat. dec."). This is a statement that you make yourself about the genuineness of the copy — as discussed briefly above — but it carries more legal weight (partly because it must be formally witnessed, and there are legislated penalties specific to the abuse of statutory declarations) ^{[NSW JP Handbook 2013, page 8]}.

Outside of Australia

General authorities

Find someone like a notary. In general, "Any person or agency recognised by the law of the country in which you live can certify documents" ^[DIBP].

Authorities affiliated to the Australian government

All offices of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection (DIBP) outside Australia have a person who can certify or witness documents (payment may be required) ^[DIBP]. The DIBP services outside Australia are commonly provided through Australian embassies ^{[DIBP office locations]}.

DFAT officers based in Australian diplomatic or consular offices can certify copies of documents intended for use in Australia or issued in Australia ^{[DFAT, Document legalisation]}.

How can I get documents 'notarised'?

Notarisation of a document is performed by a Notary Public. The document may be an original, or a copy.

Notaries public are "senior legal practitioners who prepare, attest, witness and certify original and copied legal documents" intended for use overseas" ^{[DFAT, Document legalisation]}. (A Notary Public can additionally certify copies, intended for use domestically.)

How can I get originals authenticated?

Authentication

Authentication is a process to confirm the authenticity of the document presented; it is a form of document 'legalisation'. (This differs from certification or notarisation of copies, which do not make any claim regarding the authenticity of the presumed 'original' from which copies are made.)

In general the issuing authority is best-placed to authenticate a document. However, the issuing authority may not be internationally recognised; hence, authentication by a national authority may be sought for use overseas (not for domestic use ^{[DFAT, Document legalisation]}).

The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) offers an authentication service for certain documents. This is limited to verifying that the "signature or seal on an original official Australian public document is genuine" ^{[DFAT, Document legalisation]}.

Documents not issued in Australia will only be authenticated by DFAT if they have additionally already been authenticated by a relevant local authority ^{[DFAT, Document legalisation]}. Legalisation of such documents may be performed by an authority of the issuing country either in that country, or through their offices (e.g. embassies and consulates) overseas ^{[DFAT, Document legalisation]}.

Australian 'private' documents and copies of Australian 'public' documents must be certified, signed and sealed by an Australian notary public beforehand ^{[DFAT, Document legalisation]}.

Apostille

An apostille is a standardised form of authentication certificate that is (generally) recognised by countries that are signatory to the the Convention abolishing the requirement of legalisation for foreign public documents. (Signatory countries include Australia, Austria, Germany, Switzerland, among others. Neither Indonesia nor Malaysia are signatories.)

The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) offers an apostille service for certain documents. This is limited to verifying that the "signature or seal on an original official Australian public document is genuine" ^{[DFAT, Document legalisation] [HCCH, Commission on Apostilles etc., page 13]}.

Foreign-language documents

Specific requirements exist for documents in a language other than English (LOTE) intended to be submitted to DFAT for authentication ^{[DFAT, Document legalisation]}.

Translations:
The translation must be completed, certified and signed by a Translator accredited by NAATI. The Translator must sign both a copy of the original document, and the translated document and certify that it is a "true and accurate translation of the text provided on the attached".

Documents prepared by an Australian notary public in a foreign language:
Can be submitted to DFAT without further requirements.

Why "Q & A"?

Q & A stands for question(s) and answer(s). I could have called this "FAQ", but as I am anticipating the questions before they have been asked of me, I cannot truly say whether they are frequently asked or not. And other occasionally used terms like "LFAQ" did not seem helpful.
In any case, if you have another question not addressed here, feel free to submit it on the contact form.

DISCLAIMER
The above information is of a general nature, and is not warranted to apply to your particular circumstances. You should conduct your own due diligence checks.