natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
I betragtning af hvad der er gået forud, mener Kommissionen så ikke, at der er ved at udvikle sig en egentlig »italiensk sag«, hvad angår disse episoders alvor og gentagelse?
In view of the foregoing, does the Commission agree that Italy is becoming a ‘special case’ by virtue of the serious and recurrent nature of such incidents?
Mener Kommissionen ikke, at det er nødvendigt at gribe hurtigt ind for at dæmme op for og vende en sådan tendens med alle forhåndenværende midler og på alle planer, både lokalt, nationalt og europæisk?
Does the Commission agree that urgent action must be taken to stem and reverse this trend by every available means and at every level, whether local, national or European?
Hvordan agter Kommissionen at gribe ind over for den italienske regering for at undgå, at sådanne overtrædelser af de grundlæggende rettigheder gentager sig fremover?
How does the Commission intend to approach the Italian Government with a view to preventing any further such abuses of basic human rights?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-5137/08
WRITTEN QUESTION E-5137/08
Om: Kommissær Rehns argumentation for åbning af energikapitlet med Tyrkiet
Subject: Commissioner Rehn's call for opening the energy chapter with Turkey
Kommissær Rehn erklærede den 6. september over for det tyske pressebureau DPA, at han er tilhænger af at fremskynde åbningen af energikapitlet i forhandlingerne om Tyrkiets tiltrædelse.
On 6 September Commissioner Rehn announced to the German news agency DPA that he favoured early opening of the energy chapter in the negotiations on Turkey’s accession.
Han ønsker, at dette kapitel åbnes allerede i år.
He wanted the chapter to be opened before the end of this year.
Kommissæren fremkom med denne udtalelse i anledning af konflikten mellem Georgien og Rusland.
The Commissioner made this announcement in connection with the conflict between Georgia and Russia.
Var der tale om kommissærens personlige mening, eller gengav han Kommissionens standpunkt?
Was this a personal opinion of the Commissioner’s or was he expressing a Commission position?
Hvordan kan dette standpunkt forenes med princippet om, at forhandlingsprocessen med Tyrkiet skal ske i takt med reformprocessen i Tyrkiet?
How is this position compatible with the principle that the negotiating process with Turkey should keep pace with the reform process in Turkey?
Gør de aktuelle forhandlinger med Tyrkiet så store fremskridt, at åbningen af et nyt kapitel kan retfærdiggøres?
Are the current negotiations going so well that the opening of a new chapter can be justified?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-5138/08
WRITTEN QUESTION E-5138/08
Om: Ergenekonsag i Tyrkiet
Subject: Ergenekon case in Turkey
I Ergenekonsagen anklages snesevis af personer i Tyrkiet for blandt andet sammensværgelse og terrorisme.
In the Ergenekon case dozens of people in Turkey are facing charges that include conspiracy and terrorism.
Forskellige iagttagere påpeger, at anklagerne er meget forskellige, at der bringes elementer i forbindelse med hinanden, som ikke har noget med hinanden at gøre, og at der er alvorlige tegn på, at en del af anklagerne er en form for gengældelse imod sekulære centre efter den store proces imod AKP.
Various observers have pointed out that the charges are very diverse, that elements are being connected when they have nothing to do with one another and that there are serious indications that some of the charges are a form of reprisal against secularist groups following the major trial against the AKP.
»Reporters sans Frontières« er bekymrede over, at kritiske journalister anklages.
Reporters sans Frontières is concerned that critical journalists are facing charges.
Har Kommissionen planer om at følge denne store retssag aktivt på stedet med iagttagere i retssalen?
Will the Commission be actively following this major trial on the spot, with observers in court?
Deler Kommissionen ovennævnte bekymring?
Does the Commission share the concern mentioned above?
Er der allerede blevet udvekslet tanker herom med den tyrkiske regering?
Has there been an exchange of views on this with the Turkish Government?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-5139/08
WRITTEN QUESTION E-5139/08
Om: Koordinationsproblemer i forbindelse med tysk plejeforsikring
Subject: Coordination problem with German healthcare insurance
Moderen i en familie – med seks børn – der bor i Tyskland, modtager ca. 630 euro om måneden i plejetilskud til et handicappet barn.
The mother of a family living in Germany with six children receives EUR 630 per month as ‘Pflegegeld’ (benefit) for the care of a disabled child.
Som følge af denne udbetaling er hun alderdomsforsikret i henhold til § 4 i SGB VI.
As a result of this benefit she is covered under Section 4 of the German Social Security Code (SGB VI) for an old-age pension.
Faderen er arbejdsløs og ville som grænsegænger begynde på et job i Holland.
The father is unemployed and would have liked to take a job in the Netherlands as a frontier worker.
Han skulle – som eneforsørger – sammen med sine familiemedlemmer »forsikres« i Nederlandene imod udgifter i forbindelse med sygdom (formular E-106).
He — as the only wage-earner — and his family members would have been ‘insured’ in the Netherlands for sickness costs (form E‑106).
I Nederlandene findes der imidlertid ingen eksporterbar udbetaling, som kan sammenlignes med det tyske plejetilskud.
However, in the Netherlands there is no exportable benefit comparable to the German Pflegegeld.
Som følge af denne koordineringsregel har faderen ikke påbegyndt arbejdet i Nederlandene.
As a result of this coordination rule the father has not taken the job in the Netherlands.
Der ville immervæk have været tale om et indkomsttab på 680 euro om måneden.
After all, the result would have been an income reduction of EUR 680 per month.
Er det Kommissionens opfattelse, at denne regel i medfør af forordning 1408/71 er i strid med den primære fællesskabsret, dvs. artikel 39 (arbejdskraftens frie bevægelighed), artikel 5 (proportionalitetsprincippet) og artikel 10 (loyalt samarbejde)?
Does the Commission agree that this ruling on the basis of Regulation No 1408/71 contravenes primary EC law, namely Article 39 (free movement of workers), Article 5 (proportionality principle) and Article 10 (Community loyalty)?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-5140/08
WRITTEN QUESTION E-5140/08
Om: Koordinationsproblemer i forbindelse med flamsk sygeforsikring
Subject: Coordination problem with Flemish health insurance
Den kendsgerning, at denne gruppe i henhold til forordningens artikel 28 (formular E 121) har krav på pleje betalt af Nederlandene, fører ikke til anvendelse af det nederlandske sociale sikkerhedssystem.
The fact that this group is entitled in Belgium to health care at the expense of the Netherlands under Article 28 of the Regulation (form E 121) does not result in application of the Netherlands social security system.
Dekretet om flamsk sygeforsikring (artikel 4) fastslår, at personer, der som følge af henvisningsregelen i forordning 1408/71 er forsikret i en anden medlemsstat, ikke falder ind under den persongruppe, som er den flamske sygeforsikrings arbejdsområde.
The Flemish Health Insurance Decree states in Article 4 that persons who are insured in another Member State on the basis of the implementing rules for Regulation No 1408/71 do not come within the personal scope of Flemish health insurance.
Nederlandske pensionister, der bor i Belgien, er imidlertid som følge af henvisningsreglerne ikke mere forsikrede i Nederlandene.
But on the basis of the implementing rules Dutch pensioners living in Belgium are no longer insured in the Netherlands.
Er det Kommissionens opfattelse, at denne gruppe pensionister rent faktisk er forsikret og som følge heraf bidragspligtig til den flamske sygeforsikring og derfor også har krav på udbetalinger?
Does the Commission take the view that this group of pensioners is indeed insured and/or required to contribute to the Flemish Health Insurance Scheme and is thus entitled to benefits?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-5141/08
WRITTEN QUESTION E-5141/08
af Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) , Jules Maaten (ALDE) , Bastiaan Belder (IND/DEM) , Paulo Casaca (PSE) og Feleknas Uca (GUE/NGL)
by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) , Jules Maaten (ALDE) , Bastiaan Belder (IND/DEM) , Paulo Casaca (PSE) and Feleknas Uca (GUE/NGL)
Om: International anerkendelse af massemordet på irakiske kurdere i årene 1987 — 1988 som »folkedrab« og bidrag til medicinsk støtte til de overlevende ofre
Subject: International recognition of the mass murder of Iraqi Kurds in the period 1987‑88 as genocide and contributing to medical support for the surviving victims
Har Kommissionen gjort sig bekendt med appellen fra den regionale regering i Kurdistan i Nordirak, hvori der søges international anerkendelse af karakteren af den daværende irakiske regerings Anfalkampagne i årene 1987 – 1988 som et tilfælde af folkedrab?
Is the Commission aware of the call by the regional government of Kurdistan in northern Iraq for international recognition of the nature of the Anfal campaign by the then Iraqi Government in the years 1987‑88 as a case of genocide?
Premierministerens tale: We call for international recognition of Anfal genocide, http://www.krg.org/articles/detail.asp?lngnr=12&smap=02040100&rnr=268&anr=22516
PM’s speech: ‘We call for international recognition of Anfal genocide’, http://www.krg.org/articles/detail.asp?lngnr=12&smap=02040100&rnr=268&anr=22516
Er Kommissionen bekendt med dommen fra retten i Haag fra december 2005 mod giftgashandleren Frans van Anraat, hvori der i forbindelse med Anfaloperationerne og de derpå følgende gasangreb på den kurdiske befolkning i Irak i perioden 1987–1989 tales om »folkedrab«?
Is the Commission familiar with the judgment by The Hague court in December 2005 against the poison gas dealer Frans van Anraat, in which the gas attacks on the Kurdish population in Iraq in the period 1987‑89 in connection with the Anfal operations are described as ‘genocide’?
Er Kommissionen ligesom regionalregeringen i Kurdistan og den nederlandske domstol af den opfattelse, at Anfalkampagnen kan bedømmes som folkedrab mod kurderne?
Does the Commission agree with the regional government of Kurdistan and the Dutch court that this Anfal campaign may be judged to be genocide against the Kurds?
Deler Kommissionen den opfattelse, at der skal gennemføres en international undersøgelse af de medicinske, sociale og økonomiske følger af massemordet på kurderne?
Does the Commission agree that an international inquiry should be held into the medical, social and economic consequences of the mass murder of the Kurds?
Hvad bidrager Kommissionen med for at få iværksat denne undersøgelse?
What is the Commission doing to help set up that inquiry?
Er Kommissionen villig til at yde en international indsats for at få den gennemført?
Is the Commission prepared to work for this at international level?
Er Kommissionen bekendt med, at der stadig fødes børn med defekter, der skyldes Saddam Hussein-regimets kemiske angreb på kurdiske byer og landsbyer i Irak i 1988, og at der i irakisk Kurdistan forekommer specielt mange tilfælde af kræft, herunder leukæmi, hudsygdomme, øjensygdomme og åndedrætslidelser, der kan henføres til giftgasangrebene i 1988?
Is the Commission aware that children are still being born with deformities that are attributable to the chemical attacks on the Kurdish towns and villages in Iraq by Saddam Hussein’s regime in 1988, and that in Iraqi Kurdistan an unusually large number of cases of cancer are occurring, including leukaemia, skin disease, eye disease and respiratory disorders, which are traceable to the poison gas attacks in 1988?
Er Kommissionen bekendt med »Halabja Post-Graduate Medical Institute (HMI) to Support Treatment, Research and Environmental Safety Programs for WMD Survivors«?
Is the Commission aware of the Halabja Post-Graduate Medical Institute (HMI) to Support Treatment, Research and Environmental Safety Programs for WMD Survivors?
Meddelelse fra professor Christine Gosden fra universitetet i Liverpool.
Information from Professor Christine Gosden of the University of Liverpool.
Er det Kommissionen bekendt, at dette program med relativt billige midler som f.eks. folinsyre har opnået gode resultater med hensyn til en grundlæggende sundhedspleje i irakisk Kurdistan, men at dette program siden marts 2006 har manglet finansielle midler, selv om omkostningerne kun udgør 100 000 euro om året?
Is the Commission aware that this programme has with relatively cheap resources, such as folic acid, obtained positive results in basic healthcare in Iraqi Kurdistan, but that the programme has been without financial resources since March 2006 even though its costs amount only to EUR 100 000 per year?
Deler Kommissionen det synspunkt, at det i betragtning af følgerne af brugen af disse kemiske våben er af stor betydning, at ofrene får en så god behandling som muligt, og at det for at få viden om følgerne af kemiske våben for folkesundheden er nødvendigt at foretage en undersøgelse blandt befolkningen i irakisk Kurdistan?
Does the Commission agree that, in view of the consequences of the use of chemical weapons, it is of great importance that victims obtain the best possible treatment, and that to obtain knowledge of the consequences of chemical weapons for public health there needs to be a survey of the population of Iraqi Kurdistan?
Er Kommissionen villig til helt eller delvist at overtage finansieringen af dette program?
Is the Commission prepared to take on some or all of the funding for such a programme?
Hvilken del og inden for hvilken tidshorisont?
What proportion and for what period?
Kan den forklare sit svar?
Can it give reasons for its answer?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-5142/08
WRITTEN QUESTION E-5142/08
Om: Dødsstraf for apostasi
Subject: Death penalty for apostasy
Ifølge Compass Direct og andre kilder er to iranske kristne officielt blevet tiltalt for apostasi eller frafald fra islam.
According to Compass Direct and other sources, two Iranian Christians have officially been charged with ‘apostasy’, or leaving Islam.
Ifølge et lovforslag skal det være obligatorisk at straffe apostasi med dødsstraf.
A draft law makes the death penalty mandatory for those convicted of ‘apostasy’.
Hvordan har Kommissionen givet udtryk for sin bekymring over dette lovforslag om obligatorisk dødsstraf for apostasi?
What actions have been taken by the European Commission to express concerns about the proposed draft prescribing the death penalty for apostasy?
Hvor langt er man med behandlingen af lovforslaget?
What is the status of this draft legislation?
Kan Kommissionen bekræfte forlydenderne om, at lovforslaget for nylig er blevet vedtaget af Majlis, parlamentet i Iran?
Can the European Commission confirm reports that the draft law recently has been voted in by the Majlis, Iran’s parliament?
Hvad er det næste trin i lovgivningsprocessen, inden lovforslaget træder i kraft?
What is the next step in the legislative process before the draft will come into force?
Det forlyder, at de iranske statsborgere Mahmood Matin Azad (52) og Arash Basirat (44) har siddet i fængsel siden den 15. maj 2008.
Reportedly, Iranian citizens Mahmood Matin Azad (52) and Arash Basirat (44) have been in prison since 15 May 2008.
De er officielt tiltalt for apostasi.
They have officially been charged with ‘apostasy’.
Begge mænd kan på baggrund af ovennævnte lovforslag blive dømt til døden.
In the light of the draft legislation mentioned above, both men could be sentenced to death.
Apostasi betragtes i henhold til nuværende iransk lovgivning som en forbrydelse, der kan straffes med dødsstraf, mens strafudmålingen overlades til dommerens skønsmæssige vurdering.
Under current Iranian law, ‘apostasy’ is considered a capital offence, but punishment is left to the discretion of the judge.
Kan Kommissionen bekræfte ovennævnte sager mod de to iranske statsborgere?
Can the European Commission confirm the cases against the two Iranian citizens mentioned above?
Hvad har Kommissionen i bekræftende fald foretaget for at forsvare de grundlæggende menneskerettigheder for de to iranere, som er tiltalt for apostasi?
If so, what actions have been taken by the European Commission to defend the fundamental human rights of these two Iranians accused of ‘apostasy’?
Hvad kan Kommissionen foretage over for de iranske myndigheder for at sikre fuld religionsfrihed for alle iranere uanset religion eller tro?
What measures could be taken by the European Commission against the Iranian authorities to ensure full religious freedom for all Iranians, regardless of their religion or belief?
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-5143/08
WRITTEN QUESTION E-5143/08
af Marusya Ivanova Lyubcheva (PSE)
by Marusya Ivanova Lyubcheva (PSE)
(25. september 2008)
(25 September 2008)
Om: Børnebeskyttelse og forældrerettigheder: sagen om Eli Spasova og Willem Brouwer
Subject: Child protection and parental rights: the case of Eli Spasova and Willem Brouwer
I juli 2006 i Groningen (Holland) blev børnene Eli Popova og Willum Brouwer fjernet fra deres forældre og anbragt hos en plejefamilie, efter at familien bestående af Rumyana Spasova (bulgarsk statsborger, mor til Eli og Willem) og Pieter Brouwer (hollandsk statsborger, far til Willem Brouwer) var blevet overvåget af en socialrådgiver fra Groningens kontor for børnetrivsel ( Bureau Jeugdzorg Groningen ).
In July 2006 in Groningen (Netherlands) after the family of Rumyana Spasova (Bulgarian citizen, mother of Eli and Willem) and Pieter Brouwer (Dutch citizen, father of Willem Brouwer) had been monitored by a social worker from the Groningen Child Care Office (Bureau Jeugdzorg Groningen) , the children Eli Popova and Willem Brouwer were taken away from their parents and placed in foster family care.
I juni 2007 blev børnene adskilt fra hinanden og anbragt i to forskellige plejefamilier.
In June 2007, the children were separated from one another and placed in two different foster families.
Ni måneder senere blev Eli taget ud af skolen og anbragt i en ukendt institution på trods af sin komplicerede helbredstilstand ( Thalassemia major ).
Nine months later, Eli was taken away from school and put in an unknown institution, despite her complicated medical condition ( Thalassemia major ).
Da forældrene var blevet nægtet at få oplysninger om deres børns tilstand og om, hvor de var anbragt, gjorde de bulgarske myndigheder en række forsøg på at skabe officiel kontakt til Groningens kontor for børnetrivsel og rådet for børnebeskyttelse ( Raad voor de Kinderberscherming ), hvilket indtil videre ikke har ført til positive resultater.
As the parents have been denied any information on the condition and whereabouts of their children, the Bulgarian authorities have made numerous attempts to establish an official contact with the Groningen Child Care Office and the Child Protection Council ( Raad voor de Kinderberscherming) , but no positive results have yet been achieved.
Vurderingen blev efterfulgt af en række spørgsmål til Groningens børnekontor om, hvor børnene var anbragt, samt om deres fysiske og psykiske tilstand.
The assessment was followed by a number of questions, posed to the Groningen Office, concerning the whereabouts of the children and their physical and psychological condition.
På nuværende tidspunkt har det bulgarske statslige agentur for børnebeskyttelse endnu ikke modtaget noget svar på sine spørgsmål, ligesom det ikke er lykkedes nogen anden relevant bulgarsk myndighed at skabe konstruktiv kontakt til Groningens kontor for børnetrivsel og rådet for børnebeskyttelse.
To date the Bulgarian State Agency for Child Protection has not received any answer to its questions, and neither has any other relevant Bulgarian authority succeeded in establishing a constructive contact with the Groningen Child Care Office and the Child Protection Council.
Hvad mener Rådet om en hollandsk børnebeskyttelsesinstitutions undladelse af at give oplysninger til de bulgarske statslige myndigheder om, hvor de to børn, der er bulgarske statsborgere, befinder sig, og hvilke foranstaltninger vil Rådet i den henseende kunne træffe for at sikre et institutionelt samarbejde mellem to af EU's medlemsstater angående denne sag?
How does the Council evaluate the failure of a Dutch child protection institution to provide the Bulgarian governmental authorities with information about the location of two children, who are Bulgarian citizens, and in this connection, what actions could the Council undertake in order to ensure institutional cooperation between two Member States of the European Union on this case?
Rådet har ikke drøftet det spørgsmål, der rejses af det ærede medlem.
The Council has not discussed the question raised by the Honourable Member.
Rådet har altid tillagt børns grundlæggende rettigheder og forældres rettigheder stor betydning.
The Council has consistently shown its support for the basic rights of children and for parental rights.
Denne forordning fastsætter, at hver stat udpeger en eller flere centralmyndigheder til at træffe foranstaltninger til at forbedre anvendelsen af forordningen og styrke samarbejdet med de andre medlemsstaters centralmyndigheder.
That regulation requires each Member State to designate one or more central authorities responsible for taking action to improve application of the regulation and step up cooperation with central authorities in other Member States.
Centralmyndighederne skal derfor i medfør af denne forordning samarbejde i de bestemte sager for at opfylde de mål, der er fastsat i forordningen, og især gøre alt for at indsamle og udveksle oplysninger om barnets situation, om alle sager, der verserer, eller om enhver afgørelse, der træffes vedrørende barnet.
Under that regulation, the central authorities have to cooperate in specific cases in achieving the regulation's objectives and in particular take any appropriate steps to obtain and exchange information on a child's situation and on any proceedings pending or decisions taken concerning a child.
De skal endvidere give alle oplysninger og al nyttig bistand om anbringelsen af barnet i en anden medlemsstat i medfør af forordningens artikel 56.
They also have to supply any relevant information and assistance for placement of a child in another Member State, under Article 56 of the regulation.
SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL E-5144/08
WRITTEN QUESTION E-5144/08
I juli 2006 i Groningen (Holland) blev børnene Eli Popova og Willum Brouwer fjernet fra deres forældre og anbragt hos en plejefamilie, efter at familien bestående af Rumyana Spasova (bulgarsk statsborger, mor til Eli og Willem) og Pieter Brouwer (hollandsk statsborger, far til Willem Brouwer) var blevet overvåget af en socialrådgiver fra Groningens kontor for børnetrivsel ( Bureau Jeugdzorg Groningen ).
In July 2006 in Groningen (Netherlands), the family of Rumyana Spasova (Bulgarian citizen, mother of Eli and Willem) and Pieter Brouwer (Dutch citizen, father of Willem Brouwer) had been monitored by a social worker from the Groningen Child Care Office (Bureau Jeugdzorg Groningen) , the children Eli Popova and Willem Brouwer were taken away from their parents and placed in foster family care.
I juni 2007 blev børnene adskilt fra hinanden og placeret i to forskellige plejefamilier.
In June 2007, the children were separated from one another and placed in two different foster families.
Ni måneder senere blev Eli taget ud af skolen og anbragt i en ukendt institution, på trods af sin komplicerede helbredstilstand ( Thalassemia major ).
Nine months later, Eli was taken away from school and put in an unknown institution, despite her complicated medical condition ( Thalassemia major ).
Efter retssagen blev møder mellem forældre og børn kun tilladt fra april 2007 til juni 2007, hvor moderen så sine børn for sidste gang, og hvor moderen og datteren ikke havde lov til at kommunikere på deres modersmål.
Following the court proceedings, meetings between parents and children were allowed only from April 2007 until June 2007, when the mother saw her children for the last time, and mother and daughter were prohibited from communicating in their native language.