natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
De fleste sager, som Den Europæiske Menneskerettighedsdomstol i 2002 har afsagt domme om, vedrører overtrædelser fra midt i 90'erne.
Most of the cases on which the ECHR handed down judgments in 2001 relate to violations that occurred in the mid‑1990s.
Endvidere fremgår det af rapporten fra Evaluation Group of Ministers on the European Court of Human Rights Jf. dok.
It also emerges from the report of the Evaluation Group of Ministers on the European Court of Human Rights See doc.
Ofte indgives klager vedrørende overtrædelser, der ligner eller næsten stemmer overens med dem, som Domstolen har afsagt dom om i tidligere sager.
In many cases, actions are brought that relate to violations that are the same or very similar to ones on which the Court has already issued judgments.
Mange af disse sager vil ikke blive fremsat ved Domstolen, hvis generelle foranstaltninger vedrørende tidligere overtrædelser er blevet truffet, eller sagsøgerne skulle have været informeret tidligere om de betingelser, hvorunder Menneskerettighedsdomstolen kan tage en sag op til behandling.
Many of these cases would never come to the Court if general measures relating to further violations had been taken or applicants informed at an earlier stage of the conditions on which the ECHR may examine a case.
Terrorisme og mistænktes rettigheder i en straffesag
Terrorism and the rights of suspects in criminal proceedings
Som følge af begivenhederne den 11. september 2001 i De Forenede Stater har EU hurtigt vedtaget en række instrumenter for at tage kampen mod terrorismen op.
In the wake of the 11 September attacks in the United States, the EU quickly adopted a number of instruments to combat terrorism.
Naturligvis er det meget vigtigt, at personer i EU beskyttes mod terroristiske angreb.
It is, of course, extremely important that people in the EU should be protected against terrorist acts.
Foranstaltninger med henblik på at bekæmpe terrorisme og organiseret forbrydelse bør imidlertid ikke bringe beskyttelsen af menneskerettigheder i fare.
Measures taken with a view to combating terrorism and organised crime should not, however, jeopardise the protection of human rights.
Det er særligt vigtigt, at de internationale menneskerettighedsnormer, herunder EU-chartret om grundlæggende rettigheder, fuldt ud respekteres, og at der er tilstrækkelige garantier til at beskytte mistænkte personer under en retssag.
It is particularly important that international human rights standards, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the EU, should be fully observed and that there should be adequate safeguards to protect suspects in criminal proceedings.
Kommissionens diskussionsoplæg om Procedural safeguards for suspects and their defendants in criminal proceedings Jf.: http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/unit/penal/consult_paper_proc_safeguards_en.htm . kan betragtes som et første skridt i retning af minimumsnormer i EU vedrørende procedureregler i straffesager og fortjener derfor også den nødvendige tilskyndelse.
The European Commission's discussion paper on Procedural safeguards for suspects and their defendants in criminal proceedings See http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/unit/penal/consult_paper_proc_safeguards_en.htm . may be seen as a first step towards establishing common minimum standards for procedural rules in criminal cases and should therefore be supported.
Forhåbentlig kan der påregnes en hurtig fremgang med hensyn til en fællesskabsramme for procesregler i strafferetten.
It is hoped that rapid progress will be made in establishing a Community framework of procedural rules for criminal cases.
FN – Den Internationale Straffedomstol
UN International Criminal Court
Et andet vigtigt skridt fremad med hensyn til strafferetspleje er oprettelsen af Den Internationale Straffedomstol under FN.
Another major step forward in the administration of criminal justice has been setting up of the International Criminal Court under the auspices of the UN.
Den Internationale Straffedomstols statut er undertegnet den 17. juli 1998.
The Statute of the International Criminal Court was signed on 17 July 1998.
I 2001 har Danmark, Sverige, Nederlandene og Det Forenede Kongerige ratificeret statutten.
In 2001, Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands and the United Kingdom ratified the Statute.
I 2002 var det Portugal, Irland og som sidste medlemsstat Grækenland http://untreaty.un.org/ENGLISH/bible/englishinternetbible/partI/chapterXVIII/treaty10.asp. .
In 2002, Portugal, Ireland and, as the final EU Member State, Greece also did so. http://untreaty.un.org/ENGLISH/bible/englishinternetbible/partI/chapterXVIII/treaty10.asp.
Statutten trådte i kraft den 1. juli 2002.
The Statute entered into force on 1 July 2002.
ARTIKEL 47 – ADGANG TIL EFFEKTIVE RETSMIDLER OG TIL UPARTISK DOMSTOL
ARTICLE 47 RIGHT TO AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY AND A FAIR TRIAL
Det første afsnit i artikel 47 er taget fra artikel 13 i Den Europæiske Menneskerettighedskonvention.
The first paragraph of Article 47 is taken from Article 13 of the EHRC.
De Europæiske Fællesskabers Domstol har i 2001 kun afgivet én dom i sagen.
In 2001, the CJEC delivered only one judgment in this area.
Den vedrørte en formodet overtrædelse af retten til forsvar (artikel 6, stk. 1, i Menneskerettighedskonventionen).
It related to an alleged violation of the rights of the defence (Article 6(1), EHRC).
Domstolen fandt, at anerkendelse af en absolut ret til at nægte at vidne går ud over, hvad er er nødvendigt for beskyttelsen af virksomheders ret til forsvar.
The Court held that the recognition of an absolute right of silence goes further than is necessary to protect the right of the defence of undertakings.
En virksomhed har kun ret til at nægte at vidne, hvis den skal give svar, hvormed den anerkender forekomsten af en overtrædelse, mens bevisbyrden påhviler Kommissionen.
An undertaking has a right of silence only if it is compelled to provide answers which might involve an admission on its part of the existence of an infringement which it is incumbent upon the Commission to prove.
Domstolens retspraksis
Case law of the Court of Justice
T-112/98, Mannesmannröhren-Werke AG/Kommissionen (Første udvidede afdeling), dom af 20. februar 2001 Jur.
T-112/98, Mannesmannröhren-Werke AG v Commission (First Chamber, Extended composition), judgment of 20 February 2001 ECR 2001, p.
Kommissionens undersøgelse af formodede overtrædelser af konkurrencereglerne hos virksomheden Mannesmannröhren-Werke.
The Commission initiated an investigation into possible infringements of the competition rules by Mannesmannröhren-Werke.
Kommissionen havde i en begæring pålagt virksomheden en forpligtelse til at fremkomme med oplysninger.
It adopted a decision requiring the firm to provide information.
Denne begæring har Mannesmannröhren (herefter "sagsøgeren") appelleret ved Retten af Første Instans.
In response Mannesmannröhren (hereafter 'the applicant') brought an action in the Court of First Instance.
Sagsøgeren fastslog i sit anbringende, at hans rettigheder til forsvar var krænket, hvilket var i strid med artikel 6, stk. 1, EMRK.
The applicant argued in its petition that the rights of the defence had been infringed in breach of Article 6(1) EHRC.
Denne artikel skulle ifølge sagsøgeren indføre retten til ikke at beskylde sig selv ved at fastslå en positiv handling.
The applicant claimed that, on the basis of Article 6(1) of the Convention, it may lawfully refrain from any positive action that would compel it to give evidence directly against itself in an investigation procedure.
Domstolen fastslår, at de grundlæggende rettigheder ifølge normal retspraksis hører til de generelle retsprincipper, som EU-dommeren sørger for bliver overholdt.
The Court said that it is settled case-law that fundamental rights form an integral part of the general principles of Community law whose observance is ensured by the Community judicature.
Som følge deraf undersøger Domstolen, om kravet om retten til ikke at vidne mod sig selv sætter visse grænser for Kommissionens undersøgelsesbeføjelser.
It then went on to consider whether certain limitations on the Commission's powers of investigation are implied by the need to safeguard the rights of defence.
En virksomhed kan kun have ret til at nægte at vidne, hvis den skal give et andet svar, hvormed den anerkender forekomsten af en overtrædelse, mens bevisbyrden ligger hos Kommissionen Jf. l.r.
It follows that an undertaking can be recognised as having a right to silence only to the extent that it would be compelled to provide answers which might involve an admission on its part of the existence of an infringement which it is incumbent upon the Commission to prove.
66 og 67. .
See para 66 and 67.
Den Europæiske Menneskerettighedsdomstol
European Court of Human Rights
Den Europæiske Menneskerettighedsdomstol har i 2001 afsagt forskellige domme om retten til en retfærdig rettergang .
In 2001, the ECHR handed down a number of judgments on the right to a fair trial .
De overtrædelser, der har fundet sted, vedrører de forskellige dele af "en retfærdig rettergang" som: statens bestræbelser på at påvirke resultatet af en sag, en af Vatikanet afsagt dom, som ubegrundet blev erklæret for gennemførlig og fremsættelsen af en utilstrækkelig begrundet afgørelse.
The violations established by the Court concerned various aspects of a fair trial, such as attempts by the State to influence the outcome of proceedings, declaring a judgment of the Vatican to be enforceable without any grounds, and decisions that failed to give sufficient reasons.
Grækenland : Menneskerettighedsdomstolen konstaterede, at retsstatstanken og tanken om en retfærdig rettergang medfører, at lovgiveren, bortset fra en betydelig offentlig nytte, ikke må påvirke retsplejen med hensyn til resultatet af en sag.
Greece: The Court reaffirmed that the principle of the rule of law and the notion of fair trial preclude any interference by the legislature – other than on compelling grounds of the general interest – with the administration of justice designed to influence the judicial determination of a dispute.
Finland: har ikke opfyldt kravene til en retfærdig rettergang, utilstrækkelig begrundet afgørelse.
Finland : Failure to satisfy the requirements of a fair trial, judgment did not adequately state the reasons on which it was based.
Begrundelsen, som i første omgang lød modstridende og som blev overtaget af dommeren ved den højere instans gik for vidt.
The prima facie contradictory reasoning of the Court of First Instance was simply endorsed by the higher court.
Hvad angår adgang til domstolen konkluderede Menneskerettighedsdomstolen i seks sager, at der forelå en overtrædelse, som f.eks.: af uforskyldt årsag for nogen nægtet adgang til en proces, sagsøgeren måtte ikke hindres i at anvende et retsmiddel.
In the area of access to the courts , the ECHR concluded in six cases that there had been a violation, such as: for a reason beyond his control, a person was denied a trial, the applicant must not be prevented from making use of legal remedies.
En anden sag vedrørte nogen, der ikke fik lov til at lade sig repræsentere ved en højere instans, dommeren fandt, at dette var en uforholdsmæssig begrænsning af retten til adgang til domstolen.
Another case concerned someone who was not allowed to be represented in the higher court, the Court ruled that this was a disproportionate restriction of the right of access to the courts.
Endvidere en sag, hvor det ikke var muligt at appellere en afvisning, selv om belastende fakta ikke var blevet undersøgt af en uafhængig dommer.
There was another case in which no appeal was possible against a rejection, although the facts had never been investigated by an independent court.
Den sidst drøftede sag omhandlede en kritik af, at sagsøgeren, efter at have fået afvist en klage på samme grundlag, havde måttet indgive sin begæring endnu en gang.
In the final case, an applicant was informed that, after his application had been rejected, he should have submitted a further application on the same grounds.
Domstolen dømte, at dette ikke var nogen effektiv adgang til domstolen.
The Court found that there had been no effective access to the court.
Frankrig: sagsøgeren, der bor i Tahiti, modtog kendelsen om, at han var anklaget, på den dag, hvor fristen for appel ifølge appeldomstolens fortolkning heraf, var udløbet.
France : The applicant, who lives in Tahiti, received the notification of his indictment on the day that the time limit for submitting an application to the Court of Cassation expired, according to the interpretation given by the Court of Cassation.
Frister tjener retssikkerheden, men må ikke forhindre klienten i at gøre brug af et egnet retsmiddel.
Time limits are in the interests of legal certainty but must not prevent persons subject to the law from seeking an available legal remedy.
Grækenland: sagsøgeren anfører med rette, at et tvangssalg var ugyldig.
Greece: The applicant claimed that the forced auction of his property was null and void.
Dommeren afgjorde, at muligheden for at appellere ugyldigheden var forfaldet, nu hvor salget allerede havde fundet sted.
The court held that the possibility of an appeal against the decision had lapsed as the sale had already taken place.
Sagsøgeren havde ingen kendskab til tvangssalget, på grund af stor forsømmelighed fra fogedens side.
The applicant was not notified of the sale because of gross negligence on the part of the bailiff.
Desuden behøvede han ikke at have mistanke om det forestående salg, da sagsøgeren med banken var nået til enighed om et lån.
Moreover, he could not have anticipated the sale, as he had come to an arrangement with his bank on the repayment of a loan.
Det Forenede Kongerige: den britiske regerings nægtelse af at ansætte sagsøgeren som tjenestemand i Northern Ireland Civil Service .
United Kingdom: Rejection by the British Government of the applicant's application for a post in the Northern Ireland Civil Service.
Som det fremgik af et dokument fra staten, var afvisningen sket af sikkerhedsgrunde.
A certificate issued by the State indicated that that the refusal was made on grounds of national security.
Dette var det ikke muligt at appellere.
No appeal was possible.
Menneskerettighedsdomstolen konkluderede, at sagsøgerens ret til adgang til domstolen var overtrådt.
The ECHR concluded that there had been an infringement of the applicant's right of access to a court.
Frankrig: sagsøgerens pas og pengebeløb var frataget ham af de franske justitsmyndigheder og anmodninger om tilbagelevering var ikke efterkommet.
France: The applicant's passport and a sum of money were confiscated by the French judicial authorities, and there was no response to an application for their return.
Domstolen er ikke enig med Frankrig, når landet påstår, at sagsøgeren efter afvisning af sagføreren for sin begæring, havde været nødt til at indgive sin begæring endnu en gang til dommerkontoret på samme grundlag.
The Court did not accept France's argument that, after rejection of the application to the Public Prosecutor, a request should have been made to the office of the clerk of the court on the same grounds.
Ifølge domstolen kunne det heller ikke indses, hvordan sagsøgeren havde kunnet aflede, at en anden begæring med samme indhold og på samme grundlag som det afviste ville have mulighed for at blive godtaget.
According to the Court, there was no reason for the applicant to assume that a second request on the same grounds as the application that had been rejected could have been successful.
Angående retten til offentligt møde konkluderede Den Europæiske Menneskerettighedsdomstol en overtrædelse fra Østrigs side.
In the case of the right to a public hearing , the ECHR established a violation by Austria.
Østrig: sagsøgeren var af en administrativ instans dømt, fordi han ikke havde efterkommet en opfordring til at oplyse, hvem der havde kørt hans bil.
Austria: The applicant was convicted by an administrative authority for failure to comply with the instructions of the authority to inform them who had used his car.
Hans appel herimod blev afvist af en administrativ appelinstans, uden at et møde havde fundet sted.
The applicant filed an appeal, which was dismissed by the administrative authority without any hearing being held.
I 2001 har Menneskerettighedsdomstolen i ca. 400 tilfælde konstateret overtrædelse af en rimelig frist .
In 2001, the ECHR ruled that there had been violations of the right to a hearing within a reasonable time in approximately 400 cases.
Situationen er alvorligst i Italien (i civilsager mere end 300 overtrædelser), i straffesager mere end 30 overtrædelser og i administrative sager mere end 10 overtrædelser.
The situation is most serious in Italy (more than 300 violations in civil cases), more than 30 violations in criminal cases and more than 10 in administrative cases.
For overskridelse af en passende frist dømtes ligeledes: Frankrig (19 overtrædelser), Portugal (10 overtrædelser), Østrig (6 overtrædelser), Tyskland (5 overtrædelser), Grækenland (4 overtrædelser), Luxembourg (1 overtrædelse) og Spanien (1 overtrædelse).
Other Member States were also found to have infringed the principle that a hearing must be held within a reasonable time: France (19 violations), Portugal (10 violations), Austria (6 violations), Germany (5 violations), Greece (4 violations), Luxembourg (1 violation) and Spain (1 violation).
I løbet af 2001 har Menneskerettighedsdomstolen konstateret forskellige overtrædelser vedrørende retten til ret til kontradiktion ( advarsarial proceedings ).
During 2001, the ECHR also found that there had been a number of violations of the right to adversarial proceedings .
En anklaget har ret til at føre sit eget forsvar.
A suspect has the right to conduct his own defence.
Tyskland: sagsøgeren er dømt for seksuelt misbrug af en otteårig pige.
Germany: Applicant convicted of sexual abuse of an 8-year old girl.
Dommen var baseret på erklæringer afgivet af moderen og politiet, som barnet havde fortalt denne historie til.
The conviction relied on the statements made by the mother and the police concerning the girl’s account of the relevant events.
Sagsøgeren havde ikke haft lejlighed til at (lade) udspørge pigen.
The applicant complained that he could not put questions to the child.
Domstolen fandt, at pigen ikke er blevet udspurgt af dommeren.
The Court noted that at no stage of the proceedings had the girl been questioned by a judge, nor did the applicant have any opportunity of testing her reliability.
Sagsøgeren har ikke kunnet afprøve troværdigheden af erklæringerne.
As the conviction was based only, or at least decisively, on the statements of one witness that the applicant had no opportunity to question, he was denied a fair trial.
Da hans dom kun (i hvert fald i overvejende grad) er baseret på ét vidnes forklaringer, som han ikke har kunne udspørge, har han ikke haft mulighed for en retfærdig rettergang P.S/ Tyskland , dom af 20.12.01, nr. 33900/96, s. 30, 31 og 32. .
P.S. v. Germany , judgment of 20.12.01, No 33900/96, para 30, 31 and 32.
Finland: to sager om socialsikring, appel af nægtelse af udbetaling af arbejdsløshedsunderstøttelse og nægtelse af udbetaling på grund af arbejdsuegnethed.
Finland: Two social security cases, an appeal against refusal of unemployment benefit and an appeal against refusal of invalidity benefit.
I begge tilfælde er der tale om en situation, hvor appelinstansen og senere dommerinstansen, efter at disse havde indhentet udbetalingsorganets mening, som ikke blev bekendtgjort sagsøgeren, havde truffet afgørelse om appel.
Both cases involved situations in which, on appeal, decisions were taken by the appellate body and later by the Court, after the latter had asked the social security institution for its opinion but had not informed the applicant of that opinion.
Domstolen finder, at sagsøgerne i begge procedurerne umuligt har kunnet deltage effektivt, således at begge ikke har haft nogen effektiv retssag K.S/Finland , dom af 31.5.01, nr. 29346/95, r.o.
The Court ruled in both cases that the procedure followed did not enable the applicants to participate properly in the different proceedings and thus deprived them of a fair hearing.
Domstolen var i 2001 nødt til at dømme i to sager om retten til en uafhængig og upartisk dommer .
In 2001, the ECHR had to consider two cases concerning the right to an independent and impartial tribunal .
På grund af personer, der blev inddraget i sagen, opstod det indtryk, at der ikke var tale om en uafhængig og upartisk dommer.
The persons concerned in the proceedings had the impression that the tribunal was not independent and impartial.
I første tilfælde var der tale om den rolle, som den såkaldte convening officer spillede, og i det andet tilfælde blev der i det mindste givet det indtryk, at der ikke fandt en uafhængig proces sted, på grund af den uafklarede rolle som den såkaldte Commissaire du Gouvernement spillede.
The first case involved the role of the convening officer, and, in the second case, there was at least the impression that the proceedings had not been independent because of the ambiguous role of the Government Commissioner.
Den samme situation findes desuden inden for strafferetten i Belgien, nemlig at statsadvokaten indtager en privilegeret plads i retssalen ved siden af dommerne, betræder salen sammen med dommerne og atter forlader salen via det lokale, hvor dommerne voterer.
The same situation exists in criminal law in Belgium, namely that the Public Prosecutor occupies a privileged position in the courtroom, sitting next to the judge, entering the court with the judges and then leaving the courtroom for the chambers where the judges confer.
Dette giver et vist skær af partiskhed, i hvert fald for den tiltalte i straffesagen, hvilket bør undgås.
That gives a certain impression of partiality, at least for the accused, which should be avoided.
Det Forenede Kongerige: dom afsagt af en militærdomstol.
United Kingdom: Conviction by a military court.
Den centrale rolle som "convening officer" spillede, medførte, at sagen var i strid med kravet om en uafhængig og upartisk dommer Wilkinson and Allen/Det Forenede Kongerige , dom af 6.2.01, nr. 31145/96 og 35580/97, r.o.
The central role played by the convening officer resulted in the procedure being in breach of the requirements of an independent and impartial tribunal.
Frankrig: klagen gik ud på, at det var umuligt under proceduren ved statsrådet at få indsigt i konklusionen fra "Commissaire du Gouvernement".
France: The complaint concerned the impossibility of examining the conclusion reached by the Government Commissioner in proceedings in the Council of State.
Princippet om en kontradiktorisk proces blev tilsidesat, fordi garantierne for parterne under proceduren blev tilsidesat, ved at denne kommissær trak sig tilbage til rådslagning med dommerne.
The principle of adversarial proceedings was infringed because the safeguards for the parties in the proceedings were violated by the Government Commissioner's withdrawing with the trial judges to attend the deliberations.
Menneskerettighedsdomstolen har desuden afsagt nogle domme om retten til forsvar og ligebehandling under retssagen.
The ECHR has also issued a number of judgments on the right to a defence and equality of arms .
I en sag vedrørte det en person, der er dømt uden at være til stede og uden at hans værge var til stede; en anden sag havde forsvaret en længere frist end den anklagede.
In one case, a person was convicted in absentia and in the absence of his supervisor; in another, the State had longer to prepare its case than the accused.
Igen en anden sag vedrørte nogen, der ikke har kunnet reagere.
A further case concerned someone who had no opportunity to react.
I forskellige tilfælde tilbageholdtes oplysninger, eller den anklagede kunne ikke lade sig repræsentere af en beskikket forsvarer, fordi han ikke selv mødte op under processen.
In another, information was withheld, or someone was not allowed to be represented by legal counsel when he himself could not appear at the trial.
En overtrædelse er også konstateret i en sag, hvor den beskikkede forsvarer ganske vist var til stede under processen, men ikke måtte taget ordet.
A violation was also found in a case where legal counsel was present at the proceedings but was not allowed to speak.