natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
During the debate on the Ombudsman’s annual report for 2001 on 26 September 2002 Commissioner Liikanen stated that the Commission had its own code which on many points matched the Ombudsman’s code and that the Commission was not in a position to propose a regulation containing the code of good administrative behaviour as the Commission had been invited to do.
During the debate on the Ombudsman’s annual report for 2001 on 26 September 2002 Commissioner Liikanen stated that the Commission had its own code which on many points matched the Ombudsman’s code and that the Commission was not in a position to propose a regulation containing the code of good administrative behaviour as the Commission had been invited to do.
During the debate on the Ombudsman’s annual report for 2002 on 25 September 2003 Commission Vice-President Loyola de Palacio stated that the draft Constitutional Treaty contained a legal basis for future legislation on good administrative behaviour.
During the debate on the Ombudsman’s annual report for 2002 on 25 September 2003 Commission Vice-President Loyola de Palacio stated that the draft Constitutional Treaty contained a legal basis for future legislation on good administrative behaviour.
The Ombudsman states in the annual report that, by way of follow-up, he wrote to the Commission President that this legislation ought to be prepared starting now so that it could be rapidly implemented when the Constitution is adopted.
The Ombudsman states in the annual report that, by way of follow-up, he wrote to the Commission President that this legislation ought to be prepared starting now so that it could be rapidly implemented when the Constitution is adopted.
The rapporteur can only endorse this request, not least in view of the fact that the Constitution has in the meantime been adopted by the European Council.
The rapporteur can only endorse this request, not least in view of the fact that the Constitution has in the meantime been adopted by the European Council.
- Inspection of documents and hearing of witnesses by the Ombudsman
- Inspection of documents and hearing of witnesses by the Ombudsman
Article 3(2) of the Ombudsman's statute deals partly with the Ombudsman's access to documents and partly with his hearing of witnesses.
Article 3(2) of the Ombudsman's statute deals partly with the Ombudsman's access to documents and partly with his hearing of witnesses.
By letter of 13 December 1999, the Ombudsman contacted the President of Parliament with a proposed change to the relevant provisions.
By letter of 13 December 1999, the Ombudsman contacted the President of Parliament with a proposed change to the relevant provisions.
His view was that Article 3(2) imposes restrictions on the Ombudsman in terms of his investigative powers.
His view was that Article 3(2) imposes restrictions on the Ombudsman in terms of his investigative powers.
According to the current wording, access to documents can be refused 'on duly substantiated grounds of secrecy' and access to documents from a Member State that are classed as secret may be granted only where 'that Member State has given its prior agreement'.
According to the current wording, access to documents can be refused 'on duly substantiated grounds of secrecy' and access to documents from a Member State that are classed as secret may be granted only where 'that Member State has given its prior agreement'.
In addition, employees of the institutions called on to testify must speak 'in accordance with instructions from their administrations and shall continue to be bound by their duty of professional secrecy'.
In addition, employees of the institutions called on to testify must speak 'in accordance with instructions from their administrations and shall continue to be bound by their duty of professional secrecy'.
A report was drawn up for the Committee on Constitutional Affairs with Teresa Almeida Garrett as rapporteur
A report was drawn up for the Committee on Constitutional Affairs with Teresa Almeida Garrett as rapporteur
In the resolution it was resolved to remove the above restrictions.
In the resolution it was resolved to remove the above restrictions.
Pursuant to Article 195(4) of the EC Treaty, Parliament lays down the Ombudsman's statute after consulting the Commission and with the approval of the Council acting by a qualified majority.
Pursuant to Article 195(4) of the EC Treaty, Parliament lays down the Ombudsman's statute after consulting the Commission and with the approval of the Council acting by a qualified majority.
The Commission expressed reservations about the proposal and the Council was unable to approve it.
The Commission expressed reservations about the proposal and the Council was unable to approve it.
A delegation from the Committee on Petitions that visited Copenhagen on 17-18 September 2002 submitted the problem to the Danish Minister for European Affairs, Bertel Haarder, Council President.
A delegation from the Committee on Petitions that visited Copenhagen on 17-18 September 2002 submitted the problem to the Danish Minister for European Affairs, Bertel Haarder, Council President.
He promised to raise the matter in the Council.
He promised to raise the matter in the Council.
This happened at meetings of the General Affairs Group in October and November 2002.
This happened at meetings of the General Affairs Group in October and November 2002.
A qualified majority of the Council was unable to approve Parliament's resolution.
A qualified majority of the Council was unable to approve Parliament's resolution.
However, the view was expressed that the Ombudsman's statute should be updated in the light of developments and of the implementation of Regulation No 1049/2001 on access to documents.
However, the view was expressed that the Ombudsman's statute should be updated in the light of developments and of the implementation of Regulation No 1049/2001 on access to documents.
The Ombudsman does not broach this problem in the annual report, which is surely a reflection of the fact that he has not encountered problems in connection with his inspection of documents.
The Ombudsman does not broach this problem in the annual report, which is surely a reflection of the fact that he has not encountered problems in connection with his inspection of documents.
The rapporteur believes that Article 3(2) imposes restrictions on the work of the Ombudsman, this being at variance with the confidence generally demonstrated towards the Ombudsman.
The rapporteur believes that Article 3(2) imposes restrictions on the work of the Ombudsman, this being at variance with the confidence generally demonstrated towards the Ombudsman.
The issue ought to be raised again in the new parliamentary term.
The issue ought to be raised again in the new parliamentary term.
- Cooperation between the Committee on Petitions and the Ombudsman
- Cooperation between the Committee on Petitions and the Ombudsman
There are regular calls for enhanced cooperation between the Committee on Petitions and the Ombudsman.
There are regular calls for enhanced cooperation between the Committee on Petitions and the Ombudsman.
Relations are characterised by trust and the will to cooperate, but apart from an agreement on mutual transfer of cases - which led to six complaints being tranferred to the Committee on Petitions and a further 243 complainants being advised to submit petition - it has to be recognised that cooperation is not particularly far-reaching in practice.
Relations are characterised by trust and the will to cooperate, but apart from an agreement on mutual transfer of cases - which led to six complaints being tranferred to the Committee on Petitions and a further 243 complainants being advised to submit petition - it has to be recognised that cooperation is not particularly far-reaching in practice.
Jakob Söderman himself put forward certain specific proposals for closer cooperation in connection with the presentation of the 2001 annual report, but these have not been put into practice.
Jakob Söderman himself put forward certain specific proposals for closer cooperation in connection with the presentation of the 2001 annual report, but these have not been put into practice.
One factor hampering cooperation is undoubtedly the different working methods.
One factor hampering cooperation is undoubtedly the different working methods.
In 1996, the Ombudsman established a network of contacts comprising ombudsmen and similar bodies which, among other things, was meant to make it easier to forward on complaints that are outside the Ombudsman's terms of reference to those bodies in Member States that are best suited to deal with these complaints.
In 1996, the Ombudsman established a network of contacts comprising ombudsmen and similar bodies which, among other things, was meant to make it easier to forward on complaints that are outside the Ombudsman's terms of reference to those bodies in Member States that are best suited to deal with these complaints.
The Committee on Petitions receives a large number of petitions that are declared inadmissible since they relate to matters outside the EU's field of activity.
The Committee on Petitions receives a large number of petitions that are declared inadmissible since they relate to matters outside the EU's field of activity.
The committee endeavours as far as possible to refer petitioners to other bodies that may possibly be able to deal with their case, in particular, national ombudsmen and petitions committees.
The committee endeavours as far as possible to refer petitioners to other bodies that may possibly be able to deal with their case, in particular, national ombudsmen and petitions committees.
It is plain that the Ombudsman's network of contacts could also be of use to the Committee on Petitions.
It is plain that the Ombudsman's network of contacts could also be of use to the Committee on Petitions.
The scope for gaining access to this network or for establishing a similar network in the Petitions Committee, in cooperation with the Ombudsman's office, ought to be investigated.
The scope for gaining access to this network or for establishing a similar network in the Petitions Committee, in cooperation with the Ombudsman's office, ought to be investigated.
Výroční zpráva o činnosti evropského veřejného ochránce práv za rok 2003
The annual report on the activities of the European Ombudsman for the year 2003
Právní základ v jednacím řádu
Basis in Rules of Procedure
Návrh(y) usnesení začleněný(é) do zprávy
Motion(s) for resolution(s) included in report
– s ohledem na návrh Komise předložený Radě ( KOM(2004)0451 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council ( COM(2004)0451 )
– s ohledem na zprávu Výboru pro zahraniční věci ( A6-0031/2004 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs ( A6-0031/2004 ),
Bod odůvodnění 7a (nový)
Recital (7 a) (new)
(7a) Vzhledem k tomu, že jakékoliv rozšiřování působnosti agentury nad to, co je uvedeno v nařízení (ES) č. 2667/2000, zejména v článcích 1, 2 a 15, rovněž podléhají odpovídajícím rozpočtovým procesům.
(7a) Whereas any changes to the Agency's remit, beyond what is currently stated in Regulation (EC) No 2667/2000, particularly Articles 1, 2 and 15 therof, are also subject to the relevant budgetary procedures.
ČLÁNEK l BOD 4
ARTICLE 1, POINT 4
Článek 14 (Nařízení (ES) č. 2667/2000)
Article 14 (Regulation (EC) No 2667/2000)
Článek 14 se zrušuje .
Article 14 is repealed.
Článek 14 se nahrazuje tímto:
Article 14 shall be replaced by the following:
„Komise do června 2005 předloží Radě zprávu zabývající se budoucností agentury po 31. prosinci 2006.“
‘The Commission shall, by June 2005, submit to the Council a report dealing with the future of the Agency after 31 December 2006.’
Jihovýchodní Evropa je pro Unii klíčovým regionem.
South-east Europe is a key region for the Union.
Parlament nemůže přijmout nejistou budoucnost Evropské agentury pro obnovu.
Parliament cannot allow the future of the European Agency for Reconstruction to be left in doubt.
ČLÁNEK 1 BOD 5
ARTICLE 1, POINT 5
Článek 15 (Nařízení (ES) č.2667/2000)
Article 15 (Regulation (EC) No 2667/2000)
Článek 15 se nahrazuje:
Article 15 is replaced by:
Článek 15 se nahrazuje tímto:
Article 15 shall be replaced by the following :
„Komise může delegovat na agenturu uskutečňování pomoci Společenství, o které bylo rozhodnuto pro Srbsko a Černou Horu a pro Bývalou jugoslávskou republiku Makedonii na základě nařízení (ES) č. 1628/96.
" The Commission may delegate to the Agency the execution of the Community assistance decided upon for Serbia and Montenegro and for the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia under Regulation (EC) No 1628/96.
Komise může pověřit agenturu prováděním pomoci pro povzbuzení hospodářského rozvoje komunity kyperských Turků v rámci nařízení rady (ES) č. xx/2004.“
The Commission may entrust the Agency with the implementation of assistance for encouraging the economic development of the Turkish Cypriot community within the framework of Council Regulation (EC) No xx/2004."
ČLÁNEK 1 BOD 5A (nový)
ARTICLE 1, POINT 5 A (new)
Článek 15a (nařízení (ES) č. 2667/2000)
Article 15 a (new) (Regulation (EC) No 2667/2000)
(5a) Bude vložen následující článek 15a
5a The following Article 15a shall be inserted:
„Článek 15a
"Article 15a
V zájmu další jasnosti a transparentnosti poskytne Komise Evropskému parlamentu a Radě nejpozději do 31. prosince 2004 podrobnou zprávu, která určí rozdělení úkolů mezi operační centra agentury a „decentralizované“ delegace Komise v jednotlivých oblastech, vysvětlí odůvodnění tohoto přidělení a poskytne analýzu, jak přidělení funguje v praxi pro všechny zúčastněné země a zejména pro Bývalou jugoslávskou republiku Makedonii vzhledem k její žádosti o členství v EU.“
In the interests of further clarity and transparency, the Commission shall, by 31 December 2004 at the latest, provide a detailed report to the European Parliament and the Council, setting out the distribution of tasks between the operational centres of the Agency and the "deconcentrated" Commission delegations in the respective regions, explaining the rationale behind this allocation and giving an analysis of how the allocation is working in practice for all the countries concerned and, in particular, for the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in the light of its application for EU membership."
Obecně řečeno se zdá, že agentura pracuje při plnění svých úkolů na řízení hlavních programů pomoci ES v regionu efektivně.
Generally speaking, the Agency appears to be working effectively in its task of managing the main EC assistance programmes in the region.
Jak již však vyžadoval minulý Parlament, aniž by se mu dostalo odpovědi Komise, určité problémy, které nadále ztěžují některé aspekty práce agentury by do značné míry objasnilo, kdyby Komise poskytovala zprávy jasně stanovující, jak jsou rozděleny úkoly a odpovědnosti mezi operační střediska agentury a úřady delegací Komise (nyní nazývané decentralizované delegace), které se zabývají jednotlivými oblastmi, spolu s analýzou toho, jak dobře (či jinak) toto rozdělení funguje.
However, as already requested by the last Parliament - and not yet responded to by the Commission -, provision by the Commission of a report setting out clearly how tasks/responsibilites are divided up between the Agency's centres of operation and the Commission's delegation offices (now referred to as "deconcentrated" delegations) covering the respective areas, together with an analysis of how well (or otherwise) this regulation is working, would go a long way towards clarifying certain difficulties which have continued to hamper some aspects of the Agency's work.
Návrh nařízení Rady, kterým se mění nařízení Rady (ES) č. 2667/2000 o Evropské agentuře pro obnovu
Proposal for a Council regulation amending Council Regulation (EC) N° 2667/2000 on the European Agency for Reconstruction
články 51 a 134
Rule 51 and Rule 134
Angelika Beer, Panagiotis Beglitis, Bastiaan Belder, Emma Bonino, Elmar Brok, Philip Claeys, Simon Coveney, Véronique De Keyser, Giorgos Dimitrakopoulos, Camiel Eurlings, Maciej Marian Giertych, Richard Howitt, Anna Ibrisagic, Toomas Hendrik Ilves, Ioannis Kasoulides, Helmut Kuhne, Joost Lagendijk, Vytautas Landsbergis, Francisco José Millán Mon, Philippe Morillon, Raimon Obiols i Germà, Cem Özdemir, Alojz Peterle, Tobias Pflüger, Michel Rocard, Libor Rouček, José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra, György Schöpflin, Marek Maciej Siwiec, Charles Tannock, Geoffrey Van Orden, Ari Vatanen, Jan Marinus Wiersma, Karl von Wogau, Josef Zieleniec
Angelika Beer, Panagiotis Beglitis, Bastiaan Belder, Emma Bonino, Elmar Brok, Philip Claeys, Simon Coveney, Véronique De Keyser, Giorgos Dimitrakopoulos, Camiel Eurlings, Maciej Marian Giertych, Richard Howitt, Anna Ibrisagic, Toomas Hendrik Ilves, Ioannis Kasoulides, Helmut Kuhne, Joost Lagendijk, Vytautas Landsbergis, Francisco José Millán Mon, Philippe Morillon, Raimon Obiols i Germà, Cem Özdemir, Alojz Peterle, Tobias Pflüger, Michel Rocard, Libor Rouček, José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra, György Schöpflin, Marek Maciej Siwiec, Charles Tannock, Geoffrey Van Orden, Ari Vatanen, Jan Marinus Wiersma, Karl von Wogau, Josef Zieleniec
Frederika Brepoels, Marios Matsakis, Bogusław Rogalski, Matteo Salvini, Kyriacos Triantaphyllides
Frederika Brepoels, Marios Matsakis, Bogusław Rogalski, Matteo Salvini, Kyriacos Triantaphyllides
o návrhu nařízení Rady, kterým se zřizuje nástroj finanční pomoci na podporu hospodářského rozvoje turecké komunity na Kypru
on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing an instrument of financial support for encouraging the economic development of the Turkish Cypriot community
José Albino Silva Peneda , Rozpočtový výbor
José Albino Silva Peneda , Committee on Budgets
PE 346.924V02-00
PE 346.924v02-00
NÁVRH LEGISLATIVNÍHO USNESENÍ EVROPSKÉHO PARLAMENTU .................5
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION.....................................5
STANOVISKO ROZPOČTOVÉHO VÝBORU……………………………………………9
OPINION of the Committee on Budgets ...................................................................9
o návrhu nařízení Rady, který se zřizuje nástroj finanční pomoci na podporu hospodářského rozvoje turecké kyperské komunity
on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing an instrument of financial support for encouraging the economic development of the Turkish Cypriot community
– s ohledem na návrh Komise předložený Radě ( KOM(2004)0465 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council ( COM(2004)0465 )
Dosud nezveřejněný v Úředním věstníku. a na pozměněný návrh ( KOM(2004)0696 )
Not yet published in OJ and the amended proposal ( COM(2004)0696 )
Dosud nezveřejněný v Úředním věstníku ,
Not yet published in OJ ,
– s ohledem na návrh nařízení Rady (13195/2004),
– having regard to the draft Council regulation (13195/2004),
– s ohledem na článek 308 Smlouvy o ES, podle kterého Rada konzultovala s Parlamentem ( C6‑0098/2004 ),
– having regard to Article 308 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament ( C6‑0098/2004 ),
– s ohledem na zprávu Výboru pro zahraniční věci a na stanovisko Rozpočtového výboru ( A6‑0032/2004 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets ( A6‑0032/2004 ),
Bod odůvodnění 1
Recital 1
(1) Evropská rada opakovaně zdůrazni la svou silnou preferenci vzhledem k přistoupení znovusjednoceného Kypru.
(1) The European Council has repeatedly underlined its strong preference for accession by a reunited Cyprus.
Dosud nebylo dosaženo uspokojivého řešení.
As yet, a comprehensive settlement has not been reached.
(1) Evropská rada a Evropský parlament opakovaně zdůraznily svou preferenci vzhledem k přistoupení znovusjednoceného Kypru.
(1) The European Council and the European Parliament have repeatedly underlined their strong preference for accession by a reunited Cyprus.
Evropský parlament stejně jako Rada jasně vyjádřil v několika usneseních, že podporuje přistoupení znovusjednoceného Kypru
Like Council the EP has also made clear in several resolutions that it strongly favours the accession of a reunited Cyprus
4a)Evropský parlament požaduje, aby Rada co nejdříve došla ke spravedlivému rozhodnutí o otázce obchodních vztahů.
(4a)The European Parliament requires the Council to reach a fair and just decision on the issue of trade relations as soon as possible
1 nařízení Rady (EHS) č. 3906/89, ve kterém bude zastoupen za každý členský stát vždy jeden zástupce , a kterému předsedá zástupce Komise.
The Commission shall be assisted by the Committee provided for in Article 9 (1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3906/89, composed of one representative from each Member State and chaired by a representative of the Commission.
Každý členský stát by měl mít jednoho zástupce, aby se usnadnilo rozhodování ve výboru.
Member States should have one representative each in order to facilitate the decision-making of the committee.
Pozměňovací návrh 4
Amendment 4
Činnosti podle tohoto nařízení budou prováděny v souladu s pravidly stanovenými v hlavě IV části 2 nařízení Rady 1605/2002.
Actions under this regulation shall be implemented according to the rules set down in Title IV of part 2 of Council Regulation 1605/2002.
Všechny individuální právní závazky týkající se pomoci podle tohoto nařízení budou splněny nejpozději do tří let po datu, kdy byl učiněn rozpočtový závazek.
All individual legal commitments relating to assistance under this Regulation shall be concluded no later than three years following the date of the budgetary commitment.
Vzhledem k tomu, že hlava IV finančního nařízení má název „Vnější akce“, ovlivnil by tento odkaz předem rozhodnutí rozpočtového orgánu.
Because Title IV of the Financial Regulation is "External Actions", this reference would pre-empt the decision of the budgetary authority.
Článek 5 b (nový)
Article 5 b (new)
Článek 5b
Article 5b
5b) Jakékoli změny v mandátu agentury, vyjma toho, co je již uvedeno v nařízení Rady (ES) 2667/2000 z 5. prosince 2000, podléhají také příslušným rozpočtovým postupům.
(5b) Any changes to the Agency's mandate, beyond what is currently stated in Council Regulation (EC) 2667/2000 of 5 December 2000, are also subject to the relevant budgetary procedures.'
Článek 6 a
Article 6 a (new)
Pozměňovací návrh 7
Amendment 7
Komise každoročně zašle Evropskému parlamentu a Radě zprávu o realizaci pomoci Společenství na základě tohoto nástroje.
Each year the Commission shall send to the European Parliament and the Council a report on the implementation of Community assistance under this instrument.
Zpráva bude obsahovat údaje o činnostech financovaných během daného roku a o zjištěních učiněných při sledování, a poskytne rovněž vyhodnocení výsledků dosažených při realizaci pomoci.
The report shall contain information on the actions financed during the year and on the findings of monitoring work, and shall give an assessment of the results achieved in the implementation of the assistance.
Komise každoročně, vždy k 1. květnu , zašle Evropskému parlamentu a Radě zprávu o realizaci pomoci Společenství na základě tohoto nástroje v předešlém roce .
By 1 May of each year the Commission shall send to the European Parliament and the Council a report on the implementation of Community assistance under this instrument in the previous year .
Zpráva bude obsahovat údaje o činnostech financovaných během tohoto roku a o zjištěních učiněných při sledování, a poskytne rovněž vyhodnocení výsledků dosažených při realizaci pomoci.
The report shall contain information on the actions financed during that year and on the findings of monitoring work, and shall give an assessment of the results achieved in the implementation of the assistance.
Tato zpráva by měla být dostupná před prvním čtením rozpočtu na následující rok, aby bylo možné reagovat na výsledky realizace.
This report should be available before the 1st reading of the budget of the following year, in order to be able to react to the implementation results.
Pozměňovací návrh 8
Amendment 8