The International Military Tribunal (IMT) at Nuremberg made history by introducing simultaneous interpreting to the world arena. In time, other tribunals of this sort have been organized. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) was tasked with punishing the perpetrators of the Rwandan genocide of 1994. Then as now, the interpreters were a linchpin for the proper functioning of an international tribunal. Although the recruitment, training, and practical working conditions of interpreters have evolved since Nuremberg, some issues remain eerily similar. Interpreters cannot be mere service providers, whether in terms of their positioning, the specific skills required, the technical equipment, logistical concerns, the inherent emotional immediacy, or the safeguarding of personal integrity. This paper attempts a comparison between the IMT and the ICTR considering these aspects and aims to extrapolate analogies and differences, hoping to witness an improvement in working conditions for interpreters in multilingual trials.