natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2004/38/EF af 29. april 2004 om unionsborgeres og deres familiemedlemmers ret til at færdes og opholde sig frit på medlemsstaternes område, om ændring af forordning (EØF) nr. 1612/68 og om ophævelse af direktiv 64/221/EØF, 68/360/EØF, 72/194/EØF, 73/148/EØF, 75/34/EØF, 75/35/EØF, 90/364/EØF, 90/365/EØF og 93/96/EØF (EUT L 158 af 30.4.2004, s. 77).
As regards detention of minors, the CPT standards provide for the following rules which should be respected by Member States whenever they apply — exceptionally and as a measure of last resort — detention:
I henhold til artikel 1, stk. 1, i konventionen af 1954 om statsløse personers retsstilling er en statsløs person »en person, som ingen stat i medfør af sin lovgivning anser som sin statsborger«.
CPT standards related to detention of minors — extracts
Domstolens dom af 7.6.2016, Affum, C-47/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:408.
The CPT considers that every effort should be made to avoid resorting to the deprivation of liberty of an irregular migrant who is a minor.
Domstolens dom af 6.12.2011, Achughbabian, C-329/11, ECLI:EU:C:2011:807.
Following the principle of the ‘best interests of the child’, as formulated in Article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, detention of children, including unaccompanied and separated children, is rarely justified and, in the Committee's view, can certainly not be motivated solely by the absence of residence status.
Domstolens dom af 6.12.2012, Sagor, sag C-430/11, ECLI:EU:C:2012:777.
When, exceptionally, a child is detained, the deprivation of liberty should be for the shortest possible period of time; all efforts should be made to allow the immediate release of unaccompanied or separated children from a detention facility and their placement in more appropriate care.
Domstolens dom af 15.3.2017, Al Chodor m.fl., C-528/15, ECLI:EU:C:2017:213.
Further, owing to the vulnerable nature of a child, additional safeguards should apply whenever a child is detained, particularly in those cases where the children are separated from their parents or other carers, or are unaccompanied, without parents, carers or relatives.
Artikel 2, litra n), i Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EU) nr. 604/2013 af 26. juni 2013 om fastsættelse af kriterier og procedurer til afgørelse af, hvilken medlemsstat der er ansvarlig for behandlingen af en ansøgning om international beskyttelse, der er indgivet af en tredjelandsstatsborger eller en statsløs i en af medlemsstaterne (omarbejdning) (EUT L 180 af 29.6.2013, s. 31): »»risiko for, at den pågældende forsvinder«: tilstedeværelse i den enkelte sag af grunde, der er baseret på objektive, lovfæstede kriterier, til at tro, at en ansøger eller en tredjelandsstatsborger eller statsløs, der er genstand for en tilbagesendelsesprocedure, vil forsvinde «.
As soon as possible after the presence of a child becomes known to the authorities, a professionally qualified person should conduct an initial interview, in a language the child understands.
Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2013/33/EU af 26. juni 2013 om fastlæggelse af standarder for modtagelse af ansøgere om international beskyttelse (EUT L 180 af 29.6.2013, s. 96).
Review mechanisms should also be introduced to monitor the ongoing quality of the guardianship.
Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2011/95/EU af 13. december 2011 om fastsættelse af standarder for anerkendelse af tredjelandsstatsborgere eller statsløse som personer med international beskyttelse, for en ensartet status for flygtninge eller for personer, der er berettiget til subsidiær beskyttelse, og for indholdet af en sådan beskyttelse (EUT L 337 af 20.12.2011, s. 9).
Steps should be taken to ensure a regular presence of, and individual contact with, a social worker and a psychologist in establishments holding children in detention.
I modsætning til EU-medlemsstaterne er Schweiz, Norge, Island og Liechtenstein først bundet af EU-direktiverne, jf. artikel 288 i TEUF, når de har ratificeret dem, og i henhold til almindelige folkeretlige principper.
Mixed-gender staffing is another safeguard against ill-treatment; the presence of both male and female staff can have a beneficial effect in terms of the custodial ethos and foster a degree of normality in a place of detention.
I modsætning til EU-medlemsstaterne er Schweiz, Norge, Island og Liechtenstein således ikke bundet af Domstolens praksis vedrørende gennemførelse af direktiverne i national lovgivning og kan frit vælge, hvordan de gennemfører forpligtelsen i tilbagesendelsesdirektivet (f.eks. ved direkte henvisning til direktivets ordlyd), i overensstemmelse med landets internationale forpligtelser.
Children deprived of their liberty should also be offered a range of constructive activities (with particular emphasis on enabling a child to continue his or her education).
Domstolens dom af 19.9.2013, Filev og Osmani, C-297/12, ECLI:EU:C:2013:569.
In order to limit the risk of exploitation, special arrangements should be made for living quarters that are suitable for children, for example, by separating them from adults, unless it is considered in the child's best interests not to do so.
Efter kodifikationen af Schengengrænsekodeksen i 2016 skal en henvisning til kodeksens artikel 13 læses som en henvisning til artikel 14 i forordning (EU) 2016/399.
This would, for instance, be the case when children are in the company of their parents or other close relatives.
Europarådet, den europæiske konvention om udlevering, 1957.
In that case, every effort should be made to avoid splitting up the family.
Domstolens dom af 28.4.2011, El Dridi, C-61/11 PPU, ECLI:EU:C:2011:268.
Effective complaints and inspection procedures are basic safeguards against ill-treatment in all places of detention, including detention centres for juveniles.
Domstolens dom af 23.4.2015, Zaizoune, C-38/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:260.
Juveniles (as well as their parents or legal representatives) should have avenues of complaint open to them within the establishments' administrative system and should be entitled to address complaints — on a confidential basis — to an independent authority.
FN, konventionen om flygtninges retsstilling, 1951.
Complaints procedures should be simple, effective and child-friendly, particularly regarding the language used.
Artikel 31, stk. 1, i konventionen om flygtninges retsstilling: »1.
Juveniles (as well as their parents or legal representatives) should be entitled to seek legal advice about complaints and to benefit from free legal assistance when the interests of justice so require.
Flygtninge, som kommer direkte fra et område, hvor deres liv eller frihed truedes i den i artikel 1 anførte betydning, og uden tilladelse indrejser til eller befinder sig inden for de kontraherende staters område, skal ikke i disse stater kunne straffes for ulovlig indrejse eller ophold, forudsat at de uopholdeligt henvender sig til myndighederne og godtgør, at de har haft rimelig grund til deres ulovlige indrejse eller tilstedeværelse.«
The CPT also attaches particular importance to regular visits to all detention centres for juveniles by an independent body, such as a visiting committee, a judge, the children's Ombudsman or the National Preventive Mechanism (established under the Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention against Torture — OPCAT) with authority to receive — and, if necessary, take action on — juveniles' complaints or complaints brought by their parents or legal representatives, to inspect the accommodation and facilities and to assess whether these establishments are operating in accordance with the requirements of national law and relevant international standards.
Domstolens dom af 1.10.2015, Skerdjan Celaj, C-290/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:640.
Members of the inspection body should be proactive and enter into direct contact with juveniles, including by interviewing inmates in private.
Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2009/52/EF af 18. juni 2009 om minimumsstandarder for sanktioner og foranstaltninger over for arbejdsgivere, der beskæftiger tredjelandsstatsborgere med ulovligt ophold (EUT L 168 af 30.6.2009, s. 24).
Legal basis: Return Directive — Article 18
Danmark, Schweiz, Norge, Island og Liechtenstein er ikke bundet af dette direktiv.
In situations where an exceptionally large number of third-country nationals to be returned places an unforeseen heavy burden on the capacity of the detention facilities of a Member State or on its administrative or judicial staff, such a Member State may, as long as the exceptional situation persists, decide to allow for periods for judicial review longer than those provided for under the third subparagraph of Article 15(2) and to take urgent measures in respect of the conditions of detention derogating from those set out in Articles 16(1) and 17(2).
Rådets direktiv 2003/81/EF af 29. april 2004 om udstedelse af opholdstilladelser til tredjelandsstatsborgere, der har været ofre for menneskehandel, eller som er indrejst som led i ulovlig indvandring, og som samarbejder med de kompetente myndigheder (EUT L 261 af 6.8.2004, s. 19).
When resorting to such exceptional measures, the Member State concerned shall inform the Commission.
Rådets direktiv 2001/40/EF af 28. maj 2001 om gensidig anerkendelse af afgørelser om udsendelse af tredjelandsstatsborgere (EFT L 149 af 2.6.2001, s. 34).
It shall also inform the Commission as soon as the reasons for applying these exceptional measures have ceased to exist.
Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EU) nr. 604/2013 af 26. juni 2013 om fastsættelse af kriterier og procedurer til afgørelse af, hvilken medlemsstat der er ansvarlig for behandlingen af en ansøgning om international beskyttelse, der er indgivet af en tredjelandsstatsborger eller en statsløs i en af medlemsstaterne (EUT L 180 af 29.6.2013, s. 31).
Nothing in this Article shall be interpreted as allowing Member States to derogate from their general obligation to take all appropriate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure fulfilment of their obligations under this Directive.
Eksemplerne er forenklede af hensyn til overskueligheden.
Scope of possible derogations limited to three provisions: Article 18 provides for a possibility for Member States not to apply three detention-related provisions of the Directive — (i) the obligation to provide for a speedy initial judicial review of detention; (ii) the obligation to detain only in specialised facilities; and (iii) the obligation to provide separate accommodation guaranteeing adequate privacy to families — in emergency situations involving the sudden arrival of large numbers of irregular migrants.
I praksis skal hvert tilfælde vurderes på grundlag af de individuelle omstændigheder.
Derogations to other rules contained in the Return Directive are not possible.
Konvention om gennemførelse af Schengenaftalen af 14. juni 1985 mellem regeringerne for staterne i Den Økonomiske Union Benelux, Forbundsrepublikken Tyskland og Den Franske Republik om gradvis ophævelse af kontrollen ved de fælles grænser (EFT L 239 af 22.9.2000, s. 19).
Transposition into national law is a precondition for a possible application of the emergency clause: Article 18 describes and limits the situations covered, as well as the scope of possible derogations and information obligations to the Commission.
Kommissionens henstilling K(2006) 5186 af 6.11.2006 om en fælles »Praktisk vejledning for grænsevagter (Schengenvejledning)« til brug for medlemsstaternes kompetente myndigheder ved udøvelse af grænsekontrol af personer og efterfølgende ændringer heraf.
If a Member State wishes to have the option to apply this safeguard clause in case of emergency situations, it must have properly transposed it beforehand [82] — as a possibility and in line with the criteria of Article 18 — into its national legislation.
Udtrykket er en bred opsamlingsbestemmelse, der også dækker de tilfælde, der udtrykkeligt er udelukket fra definitionen af »opholdstilladelse« i henhold til Schengengrænsekodeksens artikel 2, stk. 16, litra b, nr. i) og ii).
NB: contrary to safeguard clauses contained in regulations (for example those in the SBC related to the reintroduction of internal border control), safeguard clauses in Directives must be transposed into national law before they can be used.
Kommissionens afgørelse K(2010) 1620 af 19.3.2010 om en håndbog om behandling af visumansøgninger og ændring af udstedte visa og efterfølgende ændringer heraf.
Member States must inform the Commission when resorting to these measures and when these cease to apply.
Domstolens dom af 15.2.2016, J.N., C-601/15 PPU, ECLI:EU:C:2016:84.
Such information should be transmitted by means of the usual official channels, i.e. via the Permanent Representation to the Secretariat-General of the European Commission.
Rådets direktiv 2003/109/EF af 25. november 2003 om tredjelandsstatsborgeres status som fastboende udlænding (EUT L 16 af 23.1.2004, s. 44).
Many of the provisions of the Return Directive fulfil these requirements and have to be directly applied by national administrative and judicial authorities in those cases in which Member States have not transposed (or insufficiently transposed) certain provisions of the Directive.
Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2011/51/EU af 11. maj 2011 om ændring af Rådets direktiv 2003/109/EF for at udvide dets anvendelsesområde til at omfatte personer med international beskyttelse (EUT L 132 af 19.5.2011, s. 1).
This applies in particular to the provisions related to:
Rådets direktiv 2009/50/EF af 25. maj 2009 om indrejse- og opholdsbetingelser for tredjelandsstatsborgere med henblik på højt kvalificeret beskæftigelse (EUT L 155 af 18.6.2009, s. 17).
respect for the principle of non-refoulement (Articles 5 and 9 of the Return Directive),
Rådets dokument 8829/16.
the requirement that persons to be returned should normally be provided with an appropriate period for voluntary departure of between seven and thirty days (Article 7 of the Return Directive),
Rådets dokument 9979/16.
limitations on the use of coercive measures in connection with forced returns (Article 8 of the Return Directive),
Domstolens dom af 11. juni 2015, Z. Zh og I.O., C-554/13, ECLI:EU:C:2015:377.
right of unaccompanied minors who are subject of return procedures to receive assistance by appropriate bodies other than the authorities enforcing return and the obligation on Member States to make sure that unaccompanied minors are only returned to a member of their family, a nominated guardian or adequate reception facilities in the State of return (Article 10 of the Return Directive),
Rådets beslutning 2004/191/EF af 23. februar 2004 om fastsættelse af kriterier og nærmere bestemmelser for udligning af de finansielle ubalancer, som følger af anvendelsen af direktiv 2001/40/EF om gensidig anerkendelse af afgørelser om udsendelse af tredjelandsstatsborgere (EUT L 60, 27.2.2004, s. 55).
limitations on the length of entry bans and need for individualised case by case examination (Article 11 of the Return Directive) — expressly confirmed by the judgment of the ECJ in Case C-297/12, Filev and Osmani (paragraph 55),
Rådets direktiv 2003/110/EF af 25. november 2003 om bistand ved gennemrejse i forbindelse med udsendelse med fly (EUT L 321 af 6.12.2003, s. 26)
procedural safeguards, including the right to a written, reasoned return decision, as well as the right to an effective remedy and to legal and linguistic assistance (Articles 12 and 13 of the Return Directive),
NB: Denne fortolkning indebærer ikke, at uledsaget udsendelse er synonymt med frivillig udrejse.
limitations on the use of detention and maximum time limits for detention (Article 15 of the Return Directive) and right to human and dignified detention conditions (Article 16 of the Return Directive) — expressly confirmed by the judgment of the ECJ in Case C-61/11, El Dridi (paragraphs 46 and 47),
Udtrykket uledsaget udsendelse kan også omfatte tilfælde af tvangsmæssig tilbagesendelse (udsendelse) uden politieskorte.
limitations and special safeguards relating to the detention of minors and families (Article 17 of the Return Directive).
Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EU) 2016/1953 af 26. oktober 2016 om indførelse af et europæisk rejsedokument til brug ved tilbagesendelse af tredjelandsstatsborgere med ulovligt ophold og om ophævelse af Rådets henstilling af 30. november 1994, EUT L 311 af 17.11.2016, s. 13.
Preliminary references to the ECJ: Article 267 TFEU gives the ECJ jurisdiction to give preliminary rulings concerning the interpretation and validity of the Return Directive.
Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2013/32/EU af 26. juni 2013 om fælles procedurer for tildeling og fratagelse af international beskyttelse (omarbejdning) (EUT L 180 af 29.6.2013, s. 60).
Where such a question is raised before any court or tribunal of a Member State, that court or tribunal may, if it considers that a decision on the question is necessary to enable it to give judgment, request the ECJ to give a ruling thereon.
Rådets beslutning 2004/573/EF af 29. april 2004 om tilrettelæggelse af samlet udsendelse med fly fra to eller flere medlemsstaters område af tredjelandsstatsborgere, der er omfattet af individuelle afgørelser om udsendelse (EUT L 261 af 6.8.2004, s. 28)
Where any such question is raised in a case pending before a court or tribunal of a Member State against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law, that court or tribunal shall bring the matter before the Court.
Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EU) 2016/1624 af 14. september 2016 om den europæiske grænse- og kystvagt og om ændring af Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EU) 2016/399 og om ophævelse af Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 863/2007, Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 2007/2004 og Rådets beslutning 2005/267/EF (EUT L 251 af 16.9.2016, s. 1).
If such a question is raised in a case pending before a court or tribunal with regard to a person in detention, the ECJ shall act by means of an accelerated urgency procedure.
FN's konvention om barnets rettigheder, 1989.
Preliminary references have already played an important role for assuring a harmonised interpretation of several key provisions of the Return Directive.
UNHCR-UNICEF, Safe and Sound, 2014, findes på: http://www.refworld.org/docid/5423da264.html.
Members of courts or tribunals in Member States are encouraged to make continued use of preliminary references and to ask for authentic interpretation to the ECJ whenever this appears necessary.
FN, General comment No. 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration (artikel 3, stk. 1)*, 2013, findes på: http://www2.ohchr.org/English/bodies/crc/docs//CRC_C_GC_14_ENG.pdf.
Transitional arrangements for cases/procedures related to periods before 24 December 2010: Member States must make sure that all persons covered by the scope of the Directive benefit from the substantive safeguards and rights accorded by the Directive as of 24 December 2010 (as of the accession date in case of new Member States).
UNHCR, Guidelines on Determining the Best Interests of the Child, 2008, http://www.unhcr.org/4566b16b2.pdf.
Whilst it may be legitimate to continue national return procedures launched in accordance with pre-transposition national legislation, this must not undermine in substance the rights afforded by the Directive, such as, for example, limitation on detention and use of coercive measures, procedural safeguards including right to a written decision and to appeal against it, priority for voluntary departure.
UNHCR, Field Handbook for the Implementation of UNHCR BID Guidelines, 2011, findes på: http://www.refworld.org/pdfid/4e4a57d02.pdf.
For any return not already carried out by 24 December 2010, a written return decision must be issued in accordance with the terms of Article 12 of the Directive, and an effective remedy against this decision must be afforded in accordance with the terms of Article 13 of the Directive.
Europarådet, Twenty Guidelines on Forced Return, 2005.
‘Historic’ entry bans issued before 24 December 2010 must be adapted to the requirements of the Return Directive (see section 11.9).
Det Europæiske Asylstøttekontor, Age assessment practice in Europe, 2014, findes på: https://www.easo.europa.eu/sites/default/files/public/EASO-Age-assessment-practice-in-Europe.pdf.
Periods of detention completed before the rules in the Return Directive became applicable must be taken into account for the calculation of the overall maximum time limit provided for in the Return Directive (see section 14.4.2).
Der er ved at blive udarbejdet en ny vejledning.
Introduction of a derogation from the scope at a later stage (after 2010): Member States may decide to make use of the derogation foreseen in Article 2 (‘border cases’ and criminal law cases) at a later stage.
FN, Guidelines for the alternative care of children, 2010, findes på: http://www.refworld.org//4c3acd162.html.
A change to national legislation must not have disadvantageous consequences with regard to those persons who were already able to avail themselves of the effects of the Return Directive (see section 2).
Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 1987/2006 af 20. december 2006 om oprettelse, drift og brug af anden generation af Schengeninformationssystemet (SIS II) (EUT L 381 af 28.12.2006, s. 4).
This Handbook is based on the following sources:
Domstolens dom af 17.11.2011, Gaydarov, C-430/10, ECLI:EU:C:2011:749.
Compiled minutes of the Contact Group Return Directive.
Domstolens dom af 11.12.2014, Boudjlida, C-249/13, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2431.
Judgment of 28 April 2011, El Dridi (C-61/11 PPU), ECLI:EU:C:2011:268 (criminalisation, penalisation of illegal stay by imprisonment — IT)
Rådets direktiv 2003/9/EF af 27. januar 2003 om fastlæggelse af minimumsstandarder for modtagelse af asylansøgere i medlemsstaterne (EUT L 31 af 6.2.2003, s. 18).
Judgment of 19 September 2013, Filev and Osmani (C-297/12), ECLI:EU:C:2013:569 (entry bans, need to determine ex officio length; historic entry bans — DE)
Domstolens dom af 30.11.2009, Kadzoev, C-357/09 PPU, ECLI:EU:C:2009:741.
Judgment of 5 June 2014, Mahdi (C-146/14 PPU), ECLI:EU:C:2014:1320 (detention, reasons for prolongation and judicial supervision — BG)
En oversigt over de forskellige frister, der er gældende i henhold til national lovgivning, kan findes på: http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/evaluation/search/download.do?documentId=10737855 (s. 44-50).
Judgment of 3 July 2014, Da Silva (C-189/13), ECLI:EU:C:2014:2043 (criminalisation, illegal entry — FR)
Oversigten afspejler situationen pr. december 2013, og visse nationale regler er blevet ændret i mellemtiden.
Judgment of 17 July 2014, Bero (C-473/13) and Bouzalmate (C-514/13), ECLI:EU:C:2014:2095 (detention conditions, obligation to provide for specialised facilities — DE)
Domstolens dom af 17.7.2014, Bero og Bouzalmate, forenedes sager, C-473/13 og C-514/13, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2095.
Judgment of 17 July 2014, Pham (C-474/13), ECLI:EU:C:2014:2096 (detention conditions — DE)
Den Europæiske Unions Agentur for Grundlæggende Rettigheder, European legal and policy framework on immigration detention of children, 2017, findes på: http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2017-immigration-detention-children_en.pdf.
Judgment of 6 November 2014, Mukarubega (C-166/13), ECLI:EU:C:2014:2336 (right to be heard before issuing a return decision — FR)
For så vidt angår den specifikke situation for Schweiz, Norge, Island og Liechtenstein: se fodnote herom i afsnit 2 ovenfor.
Judgment of 11 December 2014 Boudjlida (C-249/13), ECLI:EU:C:2014:2431 (right to be heard before issuing a return decision — FR)
Første udgave af håndbogen blev vedtaget i oktober 2015 [2].
Judgment of 18 December 2014, Abdida (C-562/13), ECLI:EU:C:2014:2453 (rights pending postponed return — BE)