natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
via) musí mít náležité znalosti o začleňování hlediska pohlaví do všech politik a musí přijmout nezbytná opatření k tomu, aby bylo toto hledisko uplatňováno ve veškeré její činnosti;
(via) they must have appropriate knowledge of gender mainstreaming and they must take necessary steps to apply gender mainstreaming throughout their work;
(d) podporou rovnosti mezi muži a ženami a přispíváním k boji proti všem formám diskriminace založené na pohlaví, rasovém nebo etnickém původu, náboženství nebo víře, zdravotnímu postižení, věku nebo sexuální orientaci.
(d) promoting equality between men and women and contributing to combating all forms of discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.
(d) přispíváním k boji proti všem formám diskriminace založené na pohlaví, rasovém nebo etnickém původu, náboženství nebo víře, zdravotnímu postižení, věku nebo sexuální orientaci.
(d) contributing to combating all forms of discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.
da ) podporou rovnosti mezi muži a ženami , zlepšením účasti žen na trhu práce a zlepšením jejich přístupu k oblastem a funkcím, které vyžadují zodpovědnost, a odstraněním sociálních stereotypů týkajících se pohlaví .
(da) promoting equality between men and women, improving women's participation in the labour market and access to areas and positions of responsibility and eliminating social gender stereotypes.
c) podporovat studium druhého cizího jazyka ;
(c) to encourage the learning of a second foreign language ;
c) podporovat studium cizích jazyků;
(c) to encourage the learning of foreign languages ;
(a) studující ve vzdělávání dospělých;
(a) learners in adult education;
(a) studující ve vzdělávání dospělých, věnováním zvláštní pozornosti té části populace, která nemá základní kvalifikaci, zejména ženám;
(a) learners in adult education , paying special attention to sections of the population with no basic qualifications, especially women ;
Zpravodajn Datum jmenování
Draftsperson Date appointed
Anneli Jäätteenmäki 5.10.2004
Anneli Jäätteenmäki 5.10.2004
Integrovaný akční program v oblasti celoživotního vzdělávání
An integrated action programme in the field of lifelong learning
KOM(2004)0474 – C6 0095/2004 – 2004/0153(COD)
COM(2004)0474 – C6 0095/2004 – 2004/0153(COD)
CULT 15.9.2004
CULT 15.09.2004
FEMM 15.9.2004
FEMM 15.09.2004
LIBE 15.9.2004
LIBE 15.09.2004
ITRE 15.9.2004
ITRE 15.09.2004
Doris Pack 22.9.2004
Doris Pack 22.9.2004
Daum přijetí
Date adopted
María Badía i Cutchet, Christopher Beazley, Guy Bono, Marie-Marielle De Sarnez, Hélène Descamps, Milan Gaľa, Claire Gibault, Vasco Graça Moura, Lissy Gröner, Erna Hennicot-Schoepges, Luis Herrero-Tejedor, Ruth Hieronymi, Bernat Joan i Marí, Manolis Mavrommatis, Marianne Mikko, Ljudmila Novak, Doris Pack, Zdzisław Zbigniew Podkański, Christa Prets, Karin Resetarits, Pál Schmitt, Nikolaos Sifunakis, Hannu Takkula, Helga Trüpel, Tomáš Zatloukal.
María Badía i Cutchet, Christopher Beazley, Guy Bono, Marie-Marielle De Sarnez, Hélène Descamps, Milan Gaľa, Claire Gibault, Vasco Graça Moura, Lissy Gröner, Erna Hennicot-Schoepges, Luis Herrero-Tejedor, Ruth Hieronymi, Bernat Joan i Marí, Manolis Mavrommatis, Marianne Mikko, Ljudmila Novak, Doris Pack, Zdzisław Zbigniew Podkański, Christa Prets, Karin Resetarits, Pál Schmitt, Nikolaos Sifunakis, Hannu Takkula, Helga Trüpel, Tomáš Zatloukal.
Emine Bozkurt, Ignasi Guardans Cambó, Gyula Hegyi, Åsa Westlund.
Emine Bozkurt, Ignasi Guardans Cambó, Gyula Hegyi, Åsa Westlund.
k žádosti o zbavení Mariose Matsakise poslanecké imunity
on the request for waiver of the immunity of Marios Matsakis
PE 353.278v02-00
PE 353.278v02-00
VYSVĚTLUJÍCÍ PROHLÁŠENÍ................................................................................................5
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
PŘÍLOHA: Články 83 a 113 Ústavy Kyperské republiky..............................................................9
ANNEX: Articles 83 and 113 of the Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus
– s ohledem na žádost o zbavení Mariose Matsakise poslanecké imunity předloženou generálním prokurátorem Kyperské republiky dne 20. září 2004 a oznámenou na plenárním zasedání dne 13. října 2004,
– having regard to the request for waiver of the immunity of Marios Matsakis, forwarded by the Attorney-General of the Republic of Cyprus on 20 September 2004 and announced in plenary sitting on 13 October 2004,
– s ohledem na dopis, jehož obdržení bylo oznámeno na plenárním zasedání dne 14. října 2004 a v němž Marios Matsakis zpochybňuje pravomoc generálního prokurátora Kyperské republiky předkládat žádost o zbavení poslanecké imunity,
– having regard to the letter, announced at the plenary sitting of 14 October 2004, in which Marios Matsakis challenged the Attorney-General's authority to make such a request for waiver of his immunity,
– s ohledem na dva dopisy ze dne 13. října 2004 a 10. února 2005, které předsedovi Parlamentu zaslal stálý zástupce Kyperské republiky a které potvrzují, že generální prokurátor je oprávněn požádat o zbavení imunity kyperského poslance Evropského parlamentu,
– having regard to the two letters confirming the Attorney-General's authority to make a request for waiver of the immunity of a Cypriot MEP, sent by the Permanent Representative of the Republic of Cyprus on 13 October 2004 and on 10 February 2005 to the President of the European Parliament,
– s ohledem na dopis zaslaný předsedou Nejvyššího soudu Kyperské republiky ze dne 16. června 2005,
– having regard to the letter sent by the President of the Supreme Court of Cyprus on 16 June 2005,
– s ohledem na čl.
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A6-0268/2005 ),
3. pověřuje svého předsedu, aby ihned předal toto rozhodnutí a zprávu příslušného výboru generálnímu prokurátorovi Kyperské republiky.
Instructs its President to forward this decision and the report of its committee responsible to the Attorney-General of the Republic of Cyprus.
At the plenary session of 13 October 2004 the President of the European Parliament announced that he had received a request from the Attorney-General of the Republic of Cyprus for the waiver of the parliamentary immunity of Mr Marios Matsakis.
At the plenary session of 13 October 2004 the President of the European Parliament announced that he had received a request from the Attorney-General of the Republic of Cyprus for the waiver of the parliamentary immunity of Mr Marios Matsakis.
The waiver of his immunity is indispensable, under Article 10 (a) of the PPI and Article 83(2) of the Constitution of Cyprus, in order to to enable a full criminal investigation to be undertaken into two separate cases, in connection with which Mr Matsakis is being investigated.
The waiver of his immunity is indispensable, under Article 10 (a) of the PPI and Article 83(2) of the Constitution of Cyprus, in order to to enable a full criminal investigation to be undertaken into two separate cases, in connection with which Mr Matsakis is being investigated.
Following completion of the criminal investigation, the Court will initiate criminal proceedings against him if justified by the evidence.
Following completion of the criminal investigation, the Court will initiate criminal proceedings against him if justified by the evidence.
I.a The first case in connection with which Mr Matsakis is being investigated
I.a The first case in connection with which Mr Matsakis is being investigated
In January 2004, a police officer, in charge of an operation by the drugs squad, shot and wounded a citizen whom he was pursuing.
In January 2004, a police officer, in charge of an operation by the drugs squad, shot and wounded a citizen whom he was pursuing.
The victim was taken to hospital where, on the following day, he asked to be examined by Mr Matsakis, whom he appointed his legal adviser.
The victim was taken to hospital where, on the following day, he asked to be examined by Mr Matsakis, whom he appointed his legal adviser.
Apart from examining the victim, Mr Matsakis examined the scene of the incident and the vehicle which the victim had been driving when he was wounded.
Apart from examining the victim, Mr Matsakis examined the scene of the incident and the vehicle which the victim had been driving when he was wounded.
Since this incident involved the wounding of a citizen by a police officer in the performance of his duties, the Attorney General appointed an independent criminal investigator to examine the case.
Since this incident involved the wounding of a citizen by a police officer in the performance of his duties, the Attorney General appointed an independent criminal investigator to examine the case.
The case against the Member in question is based on an accusation made by the police officer that the Member approached him and offered to assist him in the case against him in exchange for something.
The case against the Member in question is based on an accusation made by the police officer that the Member approached him and offered to assist him in the case against him in exchange for something.
In particular, the Member allegedly said that in exchange for a sum of money he would ensure that the police officer was absolved of any criminal responsibility for wounding Mr Matsakis' client.
In particular, the Member allegedly said that in exchange for a sum of money he would ensure that the police officer was absolved of any criminal responsibility for wounding Mr Matsakis' client.
In view of the above, the criminal investigation conducted so far has been confined to taking depositions from third persons.
In view of the above, the criminal investigation conducted so far has been confined to taking depositions from third persons.
The Member himself has not been questioned and the prosecution services do not therefore have his version of events.
The Member himself has not been questioned and the prosecution services do not therefore have his version of events.
In order to complete the investigation, including the investigation of any statements which Mr Matsakis may make, it is necessary for his parliamentary immunity to be waived.
In order to complete the investigation, including the investigation of any statements which Mr Matsakis may make, it is necessary for his parliamentary immunity to be waived.
If the allegations made by the police officer are borne out, Mr Matsakis could be found guilty of committing a crime under Article 123 of the Code.
If the allegations made by the police officer are borne out, Mr Matsakis could be found guilty of committing a crime under Article 123 of the Code.
According to that article, whosoever requests property or a benefit of any kind on the basis of an agreement under which he undertakes to withhold any evidence concerning the commission of a crime, is guilty of a criminal offence.
According to that article, whosoever requests property or a benefit of any kind on the basis of an agreement under which he undertakes to withhold any evidence concerning the commission of a crime, is guilty of a criminal offence.
It is an indictable offence punishable by a term of imprisonment of up to two years and a fine of up to C£1500.
It is an indictable offence punishable by a term of imprisonment of up to two years and a fine of up to C£1500.
I.b The second case in connection with which Mr Matsakis is being investigated
I.b The second case in connection with which Mr Matsakis is being investigated
In the course of the investigation into the complaint brought by the same police officer against Mr Matsakis (case I.a), that officer told the police in passing that during his visit to Mr Matsakis house he had seen a number of carved wooden chests in the garage which ‘seemed to be old or antique’.
In the course of the investigation into the complaint brought by the same police officer against Mr Matsakis (case I.a), that officer told the police in passing that during his visit to Mr Matsakis house he had seen a number of carved wooden chests in the garage which ‘seemed to be old or antique’.
This gave rise to the suspicion that Mr Matsakis might be trafficking in antiquities, and the police decided to investigate the case further .
This gave rise to the suspicion that Mr Matsakis might be trafficking in antiquities, and the police decided to investigate the case further .
For the same reasons as are set out above, it is necessary to waive the parliamentary immunity of the Member in order to complete the investigation, including the appraisal of the chests which are allegedly in Mr Matsakis’s house.
For the same reasons as are set out above, it is necessary to waive the parliamentary immunity of the Member in order to complete the investigation, including the appraisal of the chests which are allegedly in Mr Matsakis’s house.
The criminal investigation conducted so far has been confined to taking depositions from and investigating the premises of third parties.
The criminal investigation conducted so far has been confined to taking depositions from and investigating the premises of third parties.
The Member of Parliament himself has not been questioned; this means that the prosecuting authorities do not have his own version of the events.
The Member of Parliament himself has not been questioned; this means that the prosecuting authorities do not have his own version of the events.
Nor has his house been searched.
Nor has his house been searched.
Pursuant to Article 33 of the Law the possession of antiquities by any person must be registered in special records kept by the Department of Antiquities.
Pursuant to Article 33 of the Law the possession of antiquities by any person must be registered in special records kept by the Department of Antiquities.
Failure to do so renders the possessor guilty of a criminal offence punishable by a fine of C£250 and the confiscation of the antiquity or antiquities in question.
Failure to do so renders the possessor guilty of a criminal offence punishable by a fine of C£250 and the confiscation of the antiquity or antiquities in question.
Given that it is impossible to question the Member of Parliament, the means by which the antiquities were obtained by Mr Matsakis cannot be verified.
Given that it is impossible to question the Member of Parliament, the means by which the antiquities were obtained by Mr Matsakis cannot be verified.
It should be pointed out that, under Article 26(7) of the Law, the acquisition of antiquities in breach of the above provisions of the Law constitutes a criminal offence punishable by a term of imprisonment of up to three years or a fine of C£1500 or both penalties.
It should be pointed out that, under Article 26(7) of the Law, the acquisition of antiquities in breach of the above provisions of the Law constitutes a criminal offence punishable by a term of imprisonment of up to three years or a fine of C£1500 or both penalties.
The objection raised to the waiver of immunity
The objection raised to the waiver of immunity
By letter addressed to the President of the European Parliament and announced at the plenary sitting of 14 October 2004, Mr Matsakis challenged the Attorney-General's authority to make such a request for waiver of his immunity.
By letter addressed to the President of the European Parliament and announced at the plenary sitting of 14 October 2004, Mr Matsakis challenged the Attorney-General's authority to make such a request for waiver of his immunity.
Mr Matsakis' objection is supported by three legal opinions.
Mr Matsakis' objection is supported by three legal opinions.
He relies essentially on the wording of the Cyprus Constitution, which provides in Article 83(2): "A Representative cannot, without the leave of the High Court, be prosecuted, arrested or imprisoned so long as he continues to be a Representative.(...)".
He relies essentially on the wording of the Cyprus Constitution, which provides in Article 83(2): "A Representative cannot, without the leave of the High Court, be prosecuted, arrested or imprisoned so long as he continues to be a Representative.(...)".
Consequently, in Mr Matsakis' opinion, the Attorney-General should have first applied to the High Court of Cyprus.
Consequently, in Mr Matsakis' opinion, the Attorney-General should have first applied to the High Court of Cyprus.
Only after the High Court had considered the matter and granted leave, could the Attorney-General become the competent authority to apply to the European Parliament for waiver of his immunity.
Only after the High Court had considered the matter and granted leave, could the Attorney-General become the competent authority to apply to the European Parliament for waiver of his immunity.
On 13 October 2004 and on 10 February 2005 the Permanent Representative of the Republic of Cyprus wrote to the President of the European Parliament in order to confirm that, under the Cyprus Constitution, the Attorney-General has the authority to make a request for waiver of the immunity of a Cypriot MEP.
On 13 October 2004 and on 10 February 2005 the Permanent Representative of the Republic of Cyprus wrote to the President of the European Parliament in order to confirm that, under the Cyprus Constitution, the Attorney-General has the authority to make a request for waiver of the immunity of a Cypriot MEP.
On 7 June 2005 the Chairman of the Committee on Legal Affairs, in reliance on the principle of loyal cooperation set out in Article 10 EC and as reflected in Article 19 of the PPI, wrote a letter seeking the opinion of the Supreme Court of Cyprus on the Attorney-General's competence.
On 7 June 2005 the Chairman of the Committee on Legal Affairs, in reliance on the principle of loyal cooperation set out in Article 10 EC and as reflected in Article 19 of the PPI, wrote a letter seeking the opinion of the Supreme Court of Cyprus on the Attorney-General's competence.
On 16 June 2005, the President of the Supreme Court of Cyprus replied that the Supreme Court is not vested with jurisdiction to give legal opinions on matters addressed to it outside the proper procedure envisaged by the constitution, laws and regulations.
On 16 June 2005, the President of the Supreme Court of Cyprus replied that the Supreme Court is not vested with jurisdiction to give legal opinions on matters addressed to it outside the proper procedure envisaged by the constitution, laws and regulations.
Rapporteur's assessment
Rapporteur's assessment
First of all, pursuant to Rule 7(7) of the Rules of Procedure, we have to offer an opinion about the competence of the Attorney-General of Cyprus to make a request for waiver of the immunity of a Cypriot MEP.
First of all, pursuant to Rule 7(7) of the Rules of Procedure, we have to offer an opinion about the competence of the Attorney-General of Cyprus to make a request for waiver of the immunity of a Cypriot MEP.
Generally speaking, a request submitted to the European Parliament is valid where it has been drawn up and forwarded by the authorities which, under the relevant national legislation, are entitled to submit and forward a similar request to the Parliament of the Member State concerned.
Generally speaking, a request submitted to the European Parliament is valid where it has been drawn up and forwarded by the authorities which, under the relevant national legislation, are entitled to submit and forward a similar request to the Parliament of the Member State concerned.
Under Articles 83 and 113 of the Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus, it is beyond doubt that the Attorney­General of the Republic has the power, exercisable at his discretion in the public interest, to institute, conduct, take over and continue or discontinue any proceedings for an offence against any person in the Republic.
Under Articles 83 and 113 of the Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus, it is beyond doubt that the Attorney­General of the Republic has the power, exercisable at his discretion in the public interest, to institute, conduct, take over and continue or discontinue any proceedings for an offence against any person in the Republic.
In the case of criminal proceedings brought against an MP he has to make a request for the waiver of his immunity to the High Court.
In the case of criminal proceedings brought against an MP he has to make a request for the waiver of his immunity to the High Court.
That means that the Attorney-General is the competent authority to submit requests for the waiver of immunities and that the High Court has the competence to give the Attorney-General leave to prosecute an MP.
That means that the Attorney-General is the competent authority to submit requests for the waiver of immunities and that the High Court has the competence to give the Attorney-General leave to prosecute an MP.
As far as an MEP is concerned, the same rule should be applied mutatis mutandis: the Attorney-General is the competent authority to submit a request for the waiver of immunity and the European Parliament is entitled to accede to or to reject such a request.
As far as an MEP is concerned, the same rule should be applied mutatis mutandis: the Attorney-General is the competent authority to submit a request for the waiver of immunity and the European Parliament is entitled to accede to or to reject such a request.
This is the only way in which the provisions of the Cyprus Constitution can be interpreted in conformity with Article 10(a) of the PPI which reads as follows: "During the sessions of the European Parliament, its members shall enjoy:
This is the only way in which the provisions of the Cyprus Constitution can be interpreted in conformity with Article 10(a) of the PPI which reads as follows: "During the sessions of the European Parliament, its members shall enjoy:
(a) in the territory of their own Member State , the immunities accorded to members of their parliament;(...)".
(a) in the territory of their own Member State , the immunities accorded to members of their parliament; (...)".
Furthermore, it has to be borne in mind that this argument is borne out by two letters from the Permanent Representative of the Republic of Cyprus to the European Union which officially informed the President of the European Parliament that the Attorney-General is the competent authority to request the waiver of the immunity of a Cypriot MEP.
Furthermore, it has to be borne in mind that this argument is borne out by two letters from the Permanent Representative of the Republic of Cyprus to the European Union which officially informed the President of the European Parliament that the Attorney-General is the competent authority to request the waiver of the immunity of a Cypriot MEP.
As for the merit of the request, Article 10 (a) of the PPI can be applied.
As for the merit of the request, Article 10 (a) of the PPI can be applied.
Accordingly, under Article 83(2) of the Cyprus Constitution, it is necessary to waive the parliamentary immunity of Mr Matsakis in order to complete the investigation.
Accordingly, under Article 83(2) of the Cyprus Constitution, it is necessary to waive the parliamentary immunity of Mr Matsakis in order to complete the investigation.
Past decisions on requests for waiver of immunity have created a consistent notion of an independent and autonomous European parliamentary immunity, which the Committee on Legal Affairs would confirm.
Past decisions on requests for waiver of immunity have created a consistent notion of an independent and autonomous European parliamentary immunity, which the Committee on Legal Affairs would confirm.
The application of these principles has become a fundamental criterion in the practice of the Parliament when considering what action should be taken on individual requests for waiver of immunity.
The application of these principles has become a fundamental criterion in the practice of the Parliament when considering what action should be taken on individual requests for waiver of immunity.
In all cases where the charges against a Member are related to the exercise of political activity, immunity has not been waived.
In all cases where the charges against a Member are related to the exercise of political activity, immunity has not been waived.