natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Hvordan fortolker Kommissionen, som traktaternes vogter, Rådets afslag på at give adgang til dokumenter, der kunne påvirke udfaldet af afstemningen i Parlamentet?
How does the Commission, in its role as guardian of the Treaties, interpret the Council's refusal to permit access to documents which could influence the outcome of the vote in Parliament?
Mener Kommissionen, at det i forbindelse med tiltrædelse af Schengenområdet er lovligt, at gøre yderligere betingelser gældende end dem, den rumænske stat allerede opfylder?
Does the Commission believe it is legitimate to invoke additional conditions for Schengen membership other than those already successfully put in place by Romania?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse P-000798/2011
Question for written answer P-000798/2011
Om: Forhenværende formand for Batasuna i Frankrig
Subject: Former Batasuna leader in France
Jeg vil gerne gøre Kommissionen opmærksom på den alvorlige sag om Aurore Martin, der er formand for organisationen Batasuna, som er erklæret ulovlig af Domstolen i Strasbourg på grund af samarbejde med terrororganisationen ETA.
I wish to draw the Commission's attention to the very serious case of Aurore Martin, a leader of Batasuna, an organisation declared illegal by the Strasbourg Court for its collaboration with the terrorist organisation ETA.
Aurore Martin, der er anklaget af den spanske centraldomstol for deltagelse i en terrororganisation på grund af sine aktiviteter mellem 2005 og 2008, blev anholdt den 19. maj 2010 i Sydfrankrig.
Aurore Martin, who is accused by the Spanish High Court of having been a member of a terrorist organisation due to her activities between 2005 and 2008, was arrested in the south of France on 19 May 2010.
Han blev løsladt samme dag, selvom der fandtes en europæisk arrestordre på ham for deltagelse i en terrororganisation.
She was set free the same day, despite the existence of a European arrest warrant for her membership of a terrorist organisation.
Den franske domstol i Pau var enig i den europæiske arrestordre fra november, og senere afviste den franske højesteret den sidste mulige udvej for at undgå en udlevering til Spanien.
The French court at Pau ruled in favour of the European warrant in November 2010 and the French Supreme Court subsequently rejected the last possible appeal against her extradition to Spain.
Den forhenværende formand for Batasuna befinder sig i Frankrig, hvor han giver interviews og i denne måned nærmere bestemt til tv‑kanalen »France 3«.
The former Batasuna leader remains in France, where she gives interviews (specifically, she appeared on the France 3 television channel in January 2011).
Desuden meddelte 40 folkevalgte politikere i Bayona i Sydfrankrig den 12. januar, at Aurore Martin havde opholdt sig i deres hjem på trods af den eksisterende europæiske arrestordre.
Furthermore, in Bayonne, in southern France, 40 elected officials declared on 12 January 2011 that they had sheltered Aurore Martin in their homes, despite the European warrant for her arrest.
Har Kommissionen kendskab til dette emne?
Is the Commission aware of this matter?
Hvad agter Kommissionen at foretage sig, for at folkevalgte politikere i et europæisk land som Frankrig ikke skjuler Aurore Martin i deres hjem, når der findes en europæisk arrestordre på ham?
What does the Commission intend to do in order to prevent publicly elected officials in a European country such as France from hiding Aurore Martin in their houses, when a European warrant has been issued for her arrest?
Hvad agter Kommissionen at foretage sig, for at den europæiske arrestordre bliver gennemført, og for at formanden for Batasuna bliver udleveret til Spanien og derved bliver konfronteret med anklagen for deltagelse i en terrororganisation?
What action does the Commission intend to take to ensure that the European arrest warrant is applied and this Batasuna leader is extradited to Spain to answer charges of belonging to a terrorist organisation?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse P-000805/2011
Question for written answer P-000805/2011
Om: Kommissionen og hemmelige forhandlinger om en industriaftale om bekæmpelse af fildeling
Subject: European Commission and secret talks on an anti-file-sharing industry agreement
Ifølge nylige forlydender foregår der hemmelige forhandlinger i Kommissionen under dække af en »Stakeholders' Dialogue on Online Copyright Infringements« med henblik på at etablere et »frivilligt« europæisk samarbejde mellem indehavere af intellektuelle ejendomsrettigheder og internetudbydere.
According to recent reports, secret talks under the guise of a ‘Stakeholders' Dialogue on Online Copyright Infringements’ are taking place at the European Commission to establish Europe‑wide ‘voluntary’ cooperation between IPR rights-holders and ISPs.
Ifølge de lækkede oplysninger forsøger Kommissionen at få indgået et aftalememorandum, hvormed det vil kunne kræves, at internetudbydere overvåger deres kunders daglige internetaktivitet og gør dem og indehaverne af intellektuelle ejendomsrettigheder opmærksomme på påståede krænkelser af ophavsretten, som vil kunne medføre frakobling fra internettet.
According to the leaked information, the Commission is engaged in facilitating the negotiation of a memorandum of understanding (‘MoU’) that could essentially require ISPs to monitor daily Internet activity of their customers and notify them and the IPR holders of alleged copyright infringements that could possibly involve disconnection.
Aftalememorandummet skulle gælde i hele Europa og undertegnes af brancheorganisationer såsom ETNO og IFPI.
The MoU would apply across Europe and would be signed by trade associations like ETNO and the IFPI.
Forhandlingerne siges at foregå i GD for det Indre Marked med udvalgte deltagere.
The talks are said to be taking place in DG MARKT, with a selected list of invitees.
Da Den Europæiske Forbrugerorganisation, der tilsyneladende var blevet inviteret, afviste betingelserne for deltagelse, omfatter forhandlingerne udelukkende brancherepræsentanter uden deltagelse fra det civile samfund.
As the consumers’ group BEUC was apparently invited but refused the terms of attendance, the talks are comprised exclusively of industry representatives, without civil society participation.
Privatlivets fred og databeskyttelse er et væsentligt aspekt i drøftelsen om deling af personoplysninger mellem internetudbydere og indehavere af ophavsret, men det ser ikke ud til, at tilsynsmyndighederne for databeskyttelse på noget tidspunkt er blevet inviteret til at deltage i drøftelserne.
Despite privacy and data protection being a key aspect of the discussion on sharing of personal information between ISPs and copyright holders, it appears that data protection supervisory authorities were never invited to such discussions.
Den anden halvdel af dagsordenen for forhandlingerne var revisionen af direktivet om håndhævelsen af intellektuelle ejendomsrettigheder (IPRED).
The other half of the agenda for the talks is the review of the IPR Enforcement Directive (IPRED).
Kan Kommissionen bekræfte, at der har fundet sådanne forhandlinger sted?
Can the Commission confirm that such talks have been taking place?
Hvad var i bekræftende fald dagsordenen for og listen over inviterede og deltagere i de møder, som angiveligt fandt sted den 3. februar, 3. marts, 14. april, 10. september, 14. oktober og 29. november 2010, samt evt. på andre datoer?
If so, what was the agenda and the list of invitees and participants in the meetings that reportedly took place on 3 February, 3 March, 14 April, 10 September, 14 October, and 29 November 2010, as well as possibly others?
Blev møderne ledet af de øverste tjenestemænd med ansvar for håndhævelse af ophavsret og intellektuel ejendomsret i GD for det Indre Marked, som oplyst?
Were the meetings chaired by the top civil servant responsible for copyright and IPR enforcement at DG MARKT, as reported?
Var databeskyttelsesmyndighederne, herunder Den Europæiske Tilsynsførende for Databeskyttelse, inviteret med til de møder, der drejede sig om videregivelse af personoplysninger?
Were data protection authorities, including the European Data Protection Supervisor, invited to the meetings that dealt with personal data sharing?
Er det sandt, at Kommissionen deltager i forhandlinger for lukkede døre om et aftalememorandum mellem brancheorganisationer om forhold, der direkte berører borgernes grundlæggende rettigheder?
Is it true that the Commission is engaged in closed-door negotiations of an ‘MoU’ between trade associations on matters that directly affect citizens' fundamental rights?
Hvad er Kommissionens nøjagtige rolle i disse forhandlinger, og hvordan er Kommissionens deltagelse i forhandlingen om et aftalememorandum mellem private parter i overensstemmelse med de vedtagne procedurer og princippet om gennemsigtighed?
What is the exact role of the Commission in these negotiations, and how does the Commission’s involvement in negotiating an MoU among private parties comply with the established procedures and the principle of transparency?
Benægter Kommissionen, at deltagerne i »Stakeholders' Dialogue on Online Copyright Infringements« har fået tilbudt eksklusive adgangsrettigheder og førsteret til deltagelse i den interne beslutningstagningsproces i GD for det Indre Marked i forbindelse med revisionen af IPRED?
Does the Commission deny that the participants in the ‘Stakeholders' Dialogue on Online Copyright Infringements’ have been offered exclusive access and priority involvement in DG MARKT's internal decision-making process on the review of the IPRED?
Kan den i bekræftende fald oplyse, hvem der ellers har fået lignende adgangsrettigheder og har deltaget i Kommissionens beslutninger vedrørende IPRED?
If so, could it inform us who else has been given similar access and involvement with the Commission on the IPRED matter?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse P-000806/2011
Question for written answer P-000806/2011
Ifølge nylige forlydender finder der hemmelige forhandlinger under dække af en »Stakeholders' Dialogue on Online Copyright Infringements« i Kommissionen med henblik på at etablere et europæisk »frivilligt« samarbejde mellem indehaverne af intellektuelle ejendomsrettigheder og internetudbyderne.
According to recent reports, secret talks under the guise of a ‘Stakeholders’ Dialogue on Online Copyright Infringements' are taking place at the European Commission to establish Europe-wide ‘voluntary’ cooperation between IPR rights-holders and ISPs.
Ifølge de lækkede oplysninger forsøger Kommissionen at få indgået et aftalememorandum, som primært skulle fastsætte, at internetudbyderne skal overvåge deres kunders daglige internetaktivitet og gøre dem og indehaverne af intellektuelle ejendomsrettigheder opmærksom på påståede krænkelser af ophavsretten, som kunne medføre frakobling fra internettet.
According to the leaked information, the Commission is engaged in facilitating the negotiation of a memorandum of understanding (‘MoU’) that could essentially require ISPs to monitor daily Internet activity of their customers and notify them and the IPR holders of alleged copyright infringements that could possibly involve disconnection.
Da forbrugerorganisationen BEUC tilsyneladende blev inviteret, men afviste deltagelsesvilkårene, omfatter forhandlingerne udelukkende brancherepræsentanter uden deltagelse fra det civile samfund.
As the consumers' group BEUC was apparently invited but refused the terms of attendance, the talks are comprised exclusively of industry representatives, without civil society participation.
Privatlivets fred og databeskyttelse er et væsentligt aspekt i drøftelsen om deling af personoplysninger mellem internetudbyderne og indehaverne af ophavsret, men det ser ikke ud til, at tilsynsmyndighederne for databeskyttelse på noget tidspunkt er blevet inviteret til at deltage i drøftelserne.
Despite privacy and data protection being a key aspect of the discussion on sharing of personal information between ISPs and copyright holders, it appears that data protection supervisory authorities were never invited to such discussions.
Den anden halvdel af dagsordenen for forhandlingerne er revisionen af direktivet om håndhævelsen af intellektuelle ejendomsrettigheder (IPRED).
The other half of the agenda for the talks is the review of the IPR Enforcement Directive (IPRED).
Hvad var i bekræftende fald dagsordenen for og listen over inviterede og deltagere i de møder, som angiveligt fandt sted den 3. februar, den 3. marts, den 14. april, den 10. september, den 14. oktober og den 29. november 2010, samt evt. andre?
If so, what was the agenda and the list of invitees and participants in the meetings that reportedly took place on 3 February, 3 March, 14 April, 10 September, 14 October, and 29 November 2010, as well as possibly others?
Blev møderne ledet af de højtstående tjenestemænd med ansvar for håndhævelse af ophavsret og intellektuel ejendomsret i GD for det Indre Marked som oplyst?
Were the meetings chaired by the top civil servant responsible for copyright and IPR enforcement at DG MARKT, as reported?
Var databeskyttelsesmyndighederne, herunder Den Europæiske Tilsynsførende for Databeskyttelse, inviteret til de møder, der drejede sig om videregivelse af personoplysninger?
Were data protection authorities, including the European Data Protection Supervisor, invited to the meetings that dealt with personal data sharing?
Er det sandt, at Kommissionen deltager i forhandlinger for lukkede døre om et aftalememorandum mellem brancheorganisationer om forhold, som berører borgernes grundlæggende rettigheder direkte?
Is it true that the Commission is engaged in closed-door negotiations of an ‘MoU’ between trade associations on matters that directly affect citizens' fundamental rights?
Hvad er Kommissionens nøjagtige rolle i disse forhandlinger, og hvordan er Kommissionens deltagelse i forhandlingen om et aftalememorandum mellem private parter i overensstemmelse med de vedtagne procedurer og princippet om gennemsigtighed?
What is the exact role of the Commission in these negotiations, and how does the Commission's involvement in negotiating an MoU among private parties comply with the established procedures and the principle of transparency?
Benægter Kommissionen, at deltagerne i »Stakeholders' Dialogue on Online Copyright Infringements« har fået tilbudt eneadgang til og førsteret til at deltage i den interne beslutningstagningsproces i GD for det Indre Marked i forbindelse med revisionen af IPRED?
Does the Commission deny that the participants in the Stakeholders' Dialogue on Online Copyright Infringements have been offered exclusive access and priority involvement in DG MARKT's internal decision-making process on the review of the IPRED?
Kan den i bekræftende fald oplyse, hvem der ellers har fået en lignende adgang til og deltagelse hos Kommissionen vedrørende IPRED?
If so, could it inform us who else has been given similar access and involvement with the Commission on the IPRED matter?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse P-000808/2011
Question for written answer P-000808/2011
Om: Salg af lejligheder inklusive lejerne
Subject: Sale of flats with sitting tenants
Det er en form for menneskehandel, og de nye ejere af ejendommene udsætter beboerne for eksplosivt stigende huslejer.
The tenants are treated as commodities by the new owners, who put pressure on them by imposing exorbitant rent increases.
De grundlæggende rettigheder, som de erhvervede i Folkerepublikken Polen, bliver brutalt krænket.
Basic human rights acquired during the communist period are being brutally violated.
Hvilke af Fællesskabets juridiske instrumenter kan anvendes til at stoppe denne nedrige, umenneskelige praksis?
What EC laws could be brought to bear in order to put an end to this iniquitous and inhuman practice?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse P-000809/2011
Question for written answer P-000809/2011
Om: Retssagen mod Radovan Karadzic
Subject: Trial of Radovan Karadžić
Der er allerede gået to et halvt år siden Radovan Karadzic blev arresteret og fremstillet for Domstolen i Haag.
It has been two and a half years since Radovan Karadžić was arrested and brought before the tribunal in The Hague.
Efter hans arrestation oplevede vi gentagne gange hans »moralske henrettelse« i de europæiske massemedier.
Since his arrest he has repeatedly been subjected to moral condemnation by the European media.
Personligt ved jeg ikke, om han er skyldig eller uskyldig, men jeg udtalte dengang, at man burde afvente dommen fra Den Internationale Domstol, førend man henrettede ham offentligt.
I do not know personally whether he is guilty or innocent, but I said at the time that we should wait until he was convicted by the International Tribunal before condemning him publically.
Jeg ved dog, at den retfærdighed, som er længe om at blive tildelt, ikke er retfærdighed.
But justice which is slow in being implemented is no justice at all.
Kommissionen bedes derfor oplyse, på hvilket stadie sagen befinder sig, og om den pågældende persons menneskerettigheder bliver krænket.
I would like to know, therefore, what progress has been made in this case and whether there has been any violation of the human rights of the person concerned.
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse P-000904/2011
Question for written answer P-000904/2011
Om: Kommissionens udtalelser om rekonstruktionen i Aquila, Italien
Subject: The Commission's statements on the reconstruction in Aquila, Italy
I en artikel af 13. december i avisen »il Capoluogo d'Abruzzo« (http://www.ilcapoluogo.com/site/News/Cronaca/Terremoto-Protezione‑civile‑per-Europa-appalti-regolari-36395) er Kommissionens Generaldirektorat for Det Indre Marked citeret for at have udtalt, at indkøb udført af Protezione Civile for at møde akutte behov efter jordskælvet den 6. april 2009 i Abruzzo blev foretaget i overensstemmelse med fællesskabsretten.
In an article dated 13 December 2010 in the newspaper il Capoluogo d'Abruzzo (http://www.ilcapoluogo.com/site/News/Cronaca/Terremoto-Protezione-civile-per-Europa-appalti-regolari-36395), the Commission’s DG Internal Market is quoted as stating that ‘procurement carried out by the Protezione Civile to meet the emergency needs caused by the earthquake on 6 April 2009 in Abruzzo were made in accordance with Community law’.
I artiklen hedder det desuden, at Kommissionen bekræfter kontrakternes absolutte rigtighed i forbindelse med katastrofen på grund af jordskælvet i Italien samt vedrørende konstruktionen af swimmingpoolen »Polo de Ostia«, der blev bygget til FINA-verdensmesterskaberne i 2009.
The article also states that the Commission ‘confirms the absolute regularity of contracts related to the emergency caused by the earthquake in Italy, as well as concerning the construction of the “Polo di Ostia” swimming pool, built for the FINA World Championships 2009’.
Stammer de citerede udtalelser rent faktisk fra Kommissionen?
Do the statements quoted in fact come from the Commission?
I bekræftende fald, hvilken dokumentation baserer Kommissionen da disse udtalelser på?
If so, on what documentation does the Commission base these statements?
Vil Kommissionen dele denne dokumentation med Europa-Parlamentet?
Can the Commission share this documentation with Parliament?
Hvis udtalelserne ikke stammer fra Kommissionen, vil Kommissionen da sende Parlamentet en kopi af det formelle dementi, som den vil offentliggøre?
If the statements were not made by the Commission, can the Commission then send Parliament a copy of the formal correction that it will publish?
Kommissionens tjenestegrene har undersøgt, hvilke procedurer der er fulgt ved indgåelse af offentlige kontrakter om genopbygningsarbejder efter jordskælvet i Aquila og om opførelse af svømmesportscentret »Polo di Ostia«, som det ærede medlem omtaler.
The Commission services have investigated the procedures followed for the award of public contracts related to the reconstruction works for the earthquake of L'Aquila as well as for the realisation of the Ostia swimming sport centre, as mentioned by the Honourable Member.
Hvad angår genopbygningsarbejderne som følge af jordskælvet i Aquila, er der ikke noget i undersøgelsen, der tyder på, at EU's lovgivning om offentlige indkøb er overtrådt.
As for the construction works conducted as a consequence of the L'Aquila earthquake, the investigation did not give any evidence that breaches of EU public procurement law had occurred.
Med hensyn til de offentlige kontrakter om opførelse af svømmesportscentret »Palo di Ostia« har Kommissionens tjenestegrene ligeledes fastslået, at de italienske myndigheder har overholdt de relevante EU‑bestemmelser.
As for the public contracts concerning the realisation of the Ostia swimming sport centre, the Commission services have also ascertained that the Italian Authorities had complied with the relevant EU provisions.
Skulle det ærede medlem ligge inde med relevante oplysninger om disse sager, tager Kommissionen naturligvis spørgsmålet op igen.
Should the Honourable Member have relevant information pertaining to these cases, the Commission would naturally review it.
Selv om der i medierne er udledt konklusioner fra ovennævnte undersøgelser, så har Kommissionen hverken fremsat offentlige udtalelser, erklæringer eller meddelelser om, hvorvidt de indgåede kontrakter er i overensstemmelse med EU‑bestemmelserne for indgåelse af offentlige kontrakter.
Although the media may have drawn conclusions from the closure of the abovementioned investigations, no public comments, declarations or statements have been released by the Commission on the consistency of the said awards with EU public procurement law.
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse P-000905/2011
Question for written answer P-000905/2011
Om: Forbedring af luftkvaliteten i EU: betydningen af at tackle emissioner ved kilden
Subject: Improving EU air quality: the importance of tackling emissions at source
Efter en forhandling i Kollegiet understregede kommissær Potočnik i sin erklæring den 18. januar 2011 betydningen af, at EU fortsat yder en indsats for at forbedre luftkvaliteten.
In his statement of 18 January 2011, following a debate in the College of Commissioners, Commissioner Potočnik stressed the importance of continued EU action to improve air quality.
Ifølge erklæringen anerkendte Kommissionen, at der er et presserende behov for at forbedre luftkvaliteten, og at vi hurtigst muligt skal fokusere på at forbedre luftkvaliteten.
According to the statement, the Commission ‘recognised that improving air quality is a pressing need … and that we should immediately focus on improving air quality’.
Ud over en revidering af NEC‑direktivet understregede Kommissionen betydningen af at tackle emissioner ved kilden, herunder emissioner fra køretøjer og maskineri.
In addition to revising the NEC Directive, the Commission stressed the importance of tackling emissions at source, including from vehicles and machinery.
Samtidig ser Parlamentet på to forslag fra Kommissionen med det formål at lempe de relevante emissionsstandarder for luftkvalitet.
At the same time, Parliament is looking into two proposals by the Commission seeking to relax air-quality relevant emission norms.
Det første forslag har til formål at udvide den såkaldte fleksibilitetsordning for mobile ikke‑vejgående maskiner Forslag til Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv om ændring af direktiv 97/68/EF for så vidt angår bestemmelserne for motorer, der markedsføres under fleksibilitetsordningen (KOM(2010)0362 – C7‑0171/2010 – 2010/0195(COD)) — det andet forslag har samme formål for traktorer Forslag til Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv om ændring af direktiv 2000/25/EF for så vidt angår bestemmelserne for traktorer, der markedsføres under fleksibilitetsordningen (KOM(2010)0607 – C7‑0342/2010 – 2010/0301(COD)) .
The first seeks to enlarge the so-called flexibility scheme for non-road mobile machinery (NRMM) Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 97/68/EC as regards the provisions for engines placed on the market under the flexibility scheme (COM(2010)0362 — C7‑0171/2010 — 2010/0195(COD)). , the second for tractors Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2000/25/EC as regards the provisions for tractors placed on the market under the flexibility scheme (COM(2010)0607 — C7‑0342/2010 — 2010/0301(COD)). .