natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
относно общата позиция на Съвета с оглед приемане регламент на Европейския парламент и на Съвета за връчване на съдебни и извънсъдебни документи по граждански или търговски дела в държавите-членки („връчване на документи“) и за отмяна на Регламент (ЕО) № 1348/2000 на Съвета
on the Council common position for adopting a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters ("Service of documents") and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000
– като взе предвид общата позиция на Съвета (8703/5/2007 – C6‑0217/2007 ),
– having regard to the Council common position (8703/5/2007 – C6‑0217/2007 ),
Текстове, приети на 4.7.2007 г., P6_TA(2006)0288 . по предложението на Комисията към Европейския парламент и Съвета ( COM(2005)0305 )
Texts Adopted, 4 July 2006, P6_TA(2006)0288 . on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council ( COM(2005)0305 )
– като взе предвид препоръката за второ четене на комисията по правни въпроси ( A6‑0366/2007 ),
– having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A6‑0366/2007 ),
En juillet 2005, la Commission a présenté une proposition de règlement du Parlement européen et du Conseil modifiant le règlement (CE) n° 1348/2000 du Conseil.
In July 2005, the Commission presented a draft European Parliament and Council regulation amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000.
Suite à un accord dégagé avec le Conseil sous la Présidence autrichienne, le Parlement européen a adopté, en juillet 2006, un certain nombre d'amendements qui correspondaient aux modifications convenues avec le Conseil et a officiellement invité la Commission à présenter une version codifiée du règlement n° 1348/2000 sous la forme d'une proposition modifiée.
Following an agreement reached with the Council under the Austrian Presidency, Parliament adopted a certain number of amendments in July 2006, corresponding to the changes agreed with the Council, and officially invited the Commission to submit a codified version of Regulation No 1348/2000 in the form of an amended proposal.
En décembre 2006, la Commission a soumis une proposition modifiée de règlement intégrant les amendements au règlement n° 1348/2000 adoptés par le Parlement européen et le Conseil et abrogeant ledit règlement.
In December 2006, the Commission submitted an amended proposal for a regulation embodying the amendments to Regulation No 1348/2000 adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, and repealing the aforesaid Regulation.
Une version légèrement modifiée de ce texte a été approuvée à l'unanimité lors de la session des 19 et 20 avril 2007 du Conseil qui a ensuite élaboré une position commune.
A likely modified version of this text was unanimously adopted at the Council meeting of 19 and 20 April 2007, which then drew up a joint position.
Celle-ci a été adoptée officiellement par le Conseil à l'unanimité le 28 juin 2007.
The official adoption by the Council on 28 June 2007 was unanimous.
Il faut noter que bien que le Parlement et le Conseil aient marqué leur accord sur l'insertion d'un nouvel article 15 bis (amendement 25 du Parlement), dans sa proposition modifiée, la Commission a accepté la teneur de cet amendement mais a choisi une solution consistant à insérer deux nouveaux paragraphes à l'article 8 et un nouveau paragraphe à l'article 9 au lieu d'introduire une disposition spécifique.
It should be noted that although Parliament and Council had agreed to insert a new Article 15a (amendment 25 by Parliament) in their amended proposal, the Commission accepted the spirit of this amendment, but opted for a solution involving the insertion of two fresh paragraphs into Article 8 and a new paragraph into Article 9, instead of introducing a specific provision.
Le Conseil, estimant que cette solution est parfaitement conforme au souci de bien légiférer, l'a retenue dans sa position commune.
The Council, deeming this solution to be in keeping with the goal of good lawmaking, retained it in the common position.
Le rapporteur se félicite de l'adoption dans la position commune des modifications du Parlement et préconise l'approbation de la position commune sans amendements.
Your rapporteur welcomes the adoption of Parliament’s amendments in the common position, and recommends that the common position be adopted unamended.
Abrogation du règlement n° 1348/2000
I. Repeal of Regulation No 1348/2000
Comme le Conseil et le Parlement européen avait demandé une codification du règlement n° 1348/2000, la Commission a inséré, dans sa proposition modifiée, les dispositions nécessaires pour abroger ledit règlement (considérant 27, article 25 et le tableau de correspondance à l'annexe III).
As the Council and European Parliament had requested the codification of Regulation No 1348/2000, the Commission inserted the requisite provisions for repealing this Regulation in its amended proposal (recital 27, Article 25 and the Correlation Table in Annex III).
Dans le souci de bien légiférer, le Conseil a intégré ces dispositions et le tableau de correspondance dans sa position commune.
With a view to achieving the goal of good lawmaking, the Council integrated these provisions and the Correlation Table in its common position.
Modifications apportées par le Conseil
Amendments made by the Council
Lorsque le règlement n° 1348/2000 a été adopté en mai 2000, il n'existait pas encore de pratique établie pour résoudre le problème qui se pose du fait que, conformément au Protocole sur la position du Danemark, le Danemark ne participe pas à l'adoption des mesures relevant du titre IV du traité instituant la Communauté européenne et que ces mesures ne lient pas le Danemark et ne sont pas applicables à son égard.
When Regulation No 1348/2000 in May 2000, there was as yet no established practice for resolving the problem which arises from the fact that, pursuant to the protocol on the position of Denmark, Denmark does not participate in the adoption of measures falling under Title IV of the Treaty establishing the European Community, and that these measures are neither binding on nor applicable to Denmark.
Le règlement n° 1348/2000 ne contenait donc pas la disposition désormais habituelle sur la définition d'"État membre".
Regulation No 1348/2000 did not therefore contain the otherwise standard provision on the definition of ‘Member State’.
Afin de réparer cette omission, le Conseil a inséré dans sa position commune un nouveau paragraphe 3 à l'article 1 er .
To make good this omission, the Council has inserted a new paragraph 3 into Article 1 of its common position.
Suite à la non-participation du Danemark, le Conseil a également procédé aux adaptations appropriées des annexes.
In view of Denmark’s non-participation, the Council has likewise proceeded to make the appropriate amendments to the annexes.
Le Conseil considère que sa position commune concernant le règlement relatif à la signification et à la notification des actes est parfaitement conforme aux modifications souhaitées par le Parlement européen et le Conseil et va dans le sens de la proposition modifiée de la Commission intégrant ces modifications.
The Council believes that its common position on the service of judicial documents is entirely in line with the amendments which the European Parliament and the Council were seeking, and in line with the Commission’s amended proposal incorporating these amendments.
Връчване на съдебни и извънсъдебни документи по граждански или търговски дела в държавите-членки
Service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters
4.7.2006 T6-0288/2006
4.7.2006 T6-0288/2006
Carlo Casini, Bert Doorn, Giuseppe Gargani, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Katalin Lévai, Hans-Peter Mayer, Manuel Medina Ortega, Aloyzas Sakalas, Francesco Enrico Speroni, Gary Titley, Diana Wallis, Rainer Wieland, Jaroslav Zvěřina, Tadeusz Zwiefka
Carlo Casini, Bert Doorn, Giuseppe Gargani, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Katalin Lévai, Hans-Peter Mayer, Manuel Medina Ortega, Aloyzas Sakalas, Francesco Enrico Speroni, Gary Titley, Diana Wallis, Rainer Wieland, Jaroslav Zvěřina, Tadeusz Zwiefka
Charlotte Cederschiöld, Kurt Lechner, Marie Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou, József Szájer
Charlotte Cederschiöld, Kurt Lechner, Marie Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou, József Szájer
относно искането за консултация относно привилегиите и имунитета на Gian Paolo Gobbo
on the request for consultation on the immunity and privileges of Gian Paolo Gobbo
PE 394.060v02-00
PE 394.060v02-00
РЕЗУЛТАТ ОТ ОКОНЧАТЕЛНОТО ГЛАСУВАНЕ В КОМИСИЯ.....................................9
RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE...........................................................................9
– като взе предвид искането на съдията по предварителното производство пред съда във Верона (Италия) за консултация относно парламентарния имунитет на Gian Paolo Gobbo, във връзка с наказателно производство № 81/96 R.G.N.R., и обявено на пленарно заседание на 18 януари 2007 г.,
– having regard to the request made by the judge at the preliminary hearing before the District Court of Verona (Italy) for consultation on the parliamentary immunity of Gian Paolo Gobbo, in connection with criminal procedure No. 81/96 R.G.N.R., announced in plenary sitting on 18 January 2007,
– като изслуша Gian Paolo Gobbo, съгласно член 7, параграф 3 от своя правилник,
– having heard Gian Paolo Gobbo in accordance with Rule 7(3) of its Rules of Procedure,
– като взе предвид членове 9 и 10 от Протокола за привилегиите и имунитетите на Европейските общности от 8 април 1965 г. и член 6, параграф 2 от Акта за избирането на представители в Асамблеята чрез всеобщи преки избори от 20 септември 1976 г.,
– having regard to Articles 9 and 10 of the Protocol of 8 April 1965 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities and Article 6(2) of the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage,
Дело 101/63, Wagner/Fohrmann и Krier, Сборник от 1964 г., стр. 383 и дело 149/85, Wybot/Faure и други, Сборник от 1986 г., стр. 2391. ,
Case 101/63 Wagner v Fohrmann and Krier [1964] ECR 195, and Case 149/85 Wybot v Faure and others [1986] ECR 2391. of the Court of Justice of the European Communities,
– като взе предвид член 3 от италианския закон № 140 от 20 юни 2003 г.,
– having regard to Article 3 of Italian Law No. 140 of 20 June 2003,
– като взе предвид доклада на комисията по правни въпроси ( A6‑0367/2007 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A6‑0367/2007 ),
A. като има предвид, че Gian Paolo Gobbo е член на Европейския парламент, чийто пълномощия бяха проверени от Парламента на 15 януари 2007 г.
A. whereas Gian Paolo Gobbo is a Member of the European Parliament whose credentials were verified by Parliament on 15 January 2007,
Б. като има предвид, че г-н Gobbo е обвинен - наред с много други лица, някои от които са били идентифицирани, други още не - в популяризирането, учредяването, ръководенето на и участието в паравоенна организация с политически цели, известна под наименованието "Зелените ризи",
B. whereas Mr Gobbo is charged – along with many other people, of whom some have been identified and others have not – with the offence of promoting, setting up, leading and participating in a paramilitary association with political objectives, under the title of 'the Greenshirts',
В. като има предвид, че според италианската прокуратура целта на "Зелените ризи" е била организирането на йерархично организирана структура, която е била обучавана да предприема колективни действия с насилствен или заплашителен характер и която също така е била използвана да упражнява натиск над онези членове на движението, които се противопоставят на политическите насоки на лидерите и така е предотвратявала тяхното участие в дебати вътре в движението, като по този начин е спомагала за налагането на определена политическа линия на движението "Северна лига", като е потискала изразяването на каквото и да било несъгласие вътре в него,
C. whereas, according to the Italian Prosecutors' Office, the Greenshirts' aim was to set up a hierarchically organised body which was trained to take collective action of a violent or threatening nature and was also used to intimidate any members of the movement who were opposed to the political directives issued by its leaders and prevent them from engaging in debate inside the movement, thus helping to impose a definite political line on the 'Lega Nord' movement by silencing any expression of dissent within it,
Г. като има предвид, че член 9 от Протокола за привилегиите и имунитетите предоставя на членовете на Парламента пълна защита от съдебно производство само във връзка с изразените от тях мнения или подадените от тях гласове при изпълнението на задълженията им,
D. whereas Article 9 of the Protocol on Privileges and Immunities only accords Members full protection from legal proceedings in respect of opinions expressed and votes cast by them in the performance of their duties,
Д. като има предвид, че участието в униформена организация с паравоенен характер, която очевидно е оставила впечатлението, че ще се стреми да постигне целите си с потенциалното или реалното прилагане на сила, явно противоречи на ролята и отговорностите на парламентарния мандат и е несъвместимо с тях и поради това не може да бъде разглеждано като правомерно упражняване на свободата на словото или, по принцип, като съставляващо обичайното упражняване на задълженията на член на избираемо и представляващо гражданите събрание,
E. whereas participating in a semi-military-style uniformed association which apparently gave the impression that it would seek to achieve its objectives through the potential or actual use of force is clearly contradictory to, and incompatible with, the role and responsibilities attaching to a parliamentary mandate and cannot therefore be regarded as a legitimate exercise of freedom of speech or as constituting, in general, the normal performance of the duties of members belonging to an elected assembly representing citizens,
Е. като има предвид, че съгласно член 10 от Протокола за привилегиите и имунитетите, който е единствената приложима разпоредба, по време на сесиите на Европейския парламент неговите членове притежават на територията на тяхната собствена държава имунитетите, предоставяни на членовете на националните парламенти; като има предвид, че това не пречи на Европейския парламент да упражнява правото си на снемане на имунитета на даден член на ЕП,
F. whereas, pursuant to Article 10 of the Protocol on Privileges and Immunities, which is the sole provision applicable, during the sessions of the European Parliament its Members enjoy in the territory of their own State the immunities accorded to members of their national parliament; whereas this does not prevent the European Parliament from exercising its right to waive the immunity of one of its Members,
Ж. като има предвид, че съгласно член 68 от италианската конституция депутатите на италианския парламент не притежават имунитет от наказателно преследване, освен ако не се отнася до изразени мнения или подадени от тях гласове в рамките на упражняването на функциите им, като в настоящият случай това не е така,
G. whereas under Article 68 of the Italian Constitution, members of the Italian Parliament do not enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution, except in respect of opinions expressed or votes cast by them in the exercise of their functions, which is not the case in the present instance,
Счита, че парламентарният имунитет по смисъла на член 9 от Протокола за привилегиите и имунитетите на Европейските общности от 8 април 1965 г. и - доколкото е приложим в този случай - член 68, алинея първа от италианската конституция - не се отнасят до обвиненията, предявени към Gian Paolo Gobbo, и поради това реши да не защити привилегиите и имунитета му;
Considers that parliamentary immunity within the meaning of Article 9 of the Protocol of 8 April 1965 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities and, in so far as it is relevant, Article 68, first subparagraph, of the Italian Constitution do not cover the facts alleged against Mr Gian Paolo Gobbo, and therefore decides not to defend his immunity and privileges;
Възлага на своя председател да предаде настоящото решение, както и доклада на компетентната комисия, незабавно на съответните органи на Италианската република.
Instructs its President to forward this decision, and the report of its committee responsible, immediately to the appropriate authorities of the Italian Republic.
The President referred the matter to the Committee on Legal affairs, as the committee responsible, in accordance with Rules 7(13) and 6(2) of the Rules of Procedure.
The President referred the matter to the Committee on Legal affairs, as the committee responsible, in accordance with Rules 7(13) and 6(2) of the Rules of Procedure.
Initially, according to the competent national court, the main charges against Mr Gobbo were the following: always acting in concert with many other people,
Initially, according to the competent national court, the main charges against Mr Gobbo were the following: always acting in concert with many other people,
a) he committed acts aimed at destroying the unity of the Italian State by dismembering its territory and creating a new state entity under the name of ‘Padania’, with more representative bodies at various locations under the title of ‘government’ and ‘parliament’ of the ‘federal Padanian republic’, followed by the publication of an ‘official gazette’ containing the ‘acts of the Padanian institutions’;
a) he committed acts aimed at destroying the unity of the Italian State by dismembering its territory and creating a new state entity under the name of ‘Padania’, with more representative bodies at various locations under the title of ‘government’ and ‘parliament’ of the ‘federal Padanian republic’, followed by the publication of an ‘official gazette’ containing the ‘acts of the Padanian institutions’;
b) after various attempts at obtaining international recognition for this new and artificially created entity, he called ‘Padanian elections’, urging all Italian citizens residing in northern Italy to vote for representatives to the so-called ‘Padanian parliament’;
b) after various attempts at obtaining international recognition for this new and artificially created entity, he called ‘Padanian elections’, urging all Italian citizens residing in northern Italy to vote for representatives to the so-called ‘Padanian parliament’;
c) he performed actions aimed at changing the constitution of the State and the means whereby it exercises sovereignty;
c) he performed actions aimed at changing the constitution of the State and the means whereby it exercises sovereignty;
d) finally, he promoted, set up, led and participated in a paramilitary association with political objectives, under the title of ‘the Greenshirts’, which later amalgamated with another, more complex structure known as the ‘Padanian national guard’ (GNP), which was organised in accordance with precise rules on the admission and recruitment of members – all of whom were issued with uniforms – and on the basis of a number of hierarchically organised territorial units, with local commanders being appointed and required to comply strictly with instructions from the ‘leader’ or persons delegated by him and report periodically on the actions taken in compliance with those instructions; the association in question was close to the ‘Lega Nord’ political movement and was intended to help implement and achieve the movement’s proclaimed political objectives of creating new state entities (while itself acting, in some respects, as the their police and military force) through the setting-up of a hierarchically organised body which was trained to take collective action of a violent or threatening nature (albeit presented as the legitimate defence of rights which had allegedly been violated) and was also used to intimidate any members of the movement who were opposed to the political directives issued by its leaders and prevent them from engaging in debate inside the movement, thus helping to impose a definite political line on the Legal Nord movement by silencing any expression of dissent within it.
d) finally, he promoted, set up, led and participated in a paramilitary association with political objectives, under the title of ‘the Greenshirts’, which later amalgamated with another, more complex structure known as the ‘Padanian national guard’ (GNP), which was organised in accordance with precise rules on the admission and recruitment of members – all of whom were issued with uniforms – and on the basis of a number of hierarchically organised territorial units, with local commanders being appointed and required to comply strictly with instructions from the ‘leader’ or persons delegated by him and report periodically on the actions taken in compliance with those instructions; the association in question was close to the ‘Lega Nord’ political movement and was intended to help implement and achieve the movement’s proclaimed political objectives of creating new state entities (while itself acting, in some respects, as the their police and military force) through the setting-up of a hierarchically organised body which was trained to take collective action of a violent or threatening nature (albeit presented as the legitimate defence of rights which had allegedly been violated) and was also used to intimidate any members of the movement who were opposed to the political directives issued by its leaders and prevent them from engaging in debate inside the movement, thus helping to impose a definite political line on the Legal Nord movement by silencing any expression of dissent within it.
Since some of the accused for the same charges were members of the two Chambers of the national Parliament, the latter were asked to judge whether they were only expressing their opinion in the performance of their parliamentary duties and whether (national) absolute immunity was therefore applicable.
Since some of the accused for the same charges were members of the two Chambers of the national Parliament, the latter were asked to judge whether they were only expressing their opinion in the performance of their parliamentary duties and whether (national) absolute immunity was therefore applicable.
On 31 January 2001, the Italian Senate stated that the incriminated behaviour was just "the bizarre attempt to draw some attention to political proposals which were the subject of proper parliamentary activity" and that it simply consisted of "singular mechanisms for propagandising institutional activities".
On 31 January 2001, the Italian Senate stated that the incriminated behaviour was just "the bizarre attempt to draw some attention to political proposals which were the subject of proper parliamentary activity" and that it simply consisted of "singular mechanisms for propagandising institutional activities".
It thus concluded that, as "those emphatic and evocative demonstrations can only be regarded as the external projection of the political plan put forward in the institutions, which was simply designed to make that plan more visible" , all charges against national members were covered by absolute immunity.
It thus concluded that, as "those emphatic and evocative demonstrations can only be regarded as the external projection of the political plan put forward in the institutions, which was simply designed to make that plan more visible" , all charges against national members were covered by absolute immunity.
As a consequence, on 5 October 2006, all the accused were acquitted on the grounds that the actions ascribed to them under points a), b) and c) of the request of committal (see above) were no longer classified as offences and the offence with which they were charged under point d) had partly fallen under the statute of limitations.
As a consequence, on 5 October 2006, all the accused were acquitted on the grounds that the actions ascribed to them under points a), b) and c) of the request of committal (see above) were no longer classified as offences and the offence with which they were charged under point d) had partly fallen under the statute of limitations.