natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Dette kriterium er baseret på formålet med behandlingen og ikke
Another distinction to be made is that security measures (sûreté in French) are not measures related to security of buildings, for example, but measures adopted in the framework of legal proceedings.
Frist, suspension og forlængelse kun på indsamling af evalueringsoplysninger, hvis der ikke er noget formål med en yderligere evaluering af den pågældende person (også her er det behandlingen forud for evalueringen, der skal foretages en forudgående kontrol af).
Period, suspension and extension e EDPS must deliver his opinion within two months following the receipt of the notification. Should the EDPS make a request for further information, the period of two months is usually suspended until the EDPS has obtained the relevant information.
EDPS skal afgive udtalelse senest to måneder efter modtagelsen af anmeldelsen. Hvis EDPS anmoder om yderligere oplysninger, suspenderes fristen på to måneder normalt, indtil EDPS har modtaget de relevante oplysninger.
(b) Processing operations intended to evaluate personal aspects relating to the data subject, including his or her ability, efficiency and conduct. e criterion is based on the purpose of the processing and not on the mere gathering of evaluation data if there is no purpose of further evaluation of the individual (here too, the previous processing of the evaluation is in itself subject to prior checking).
Er det nødvendigt på grund af sagens komplekse karakter, kan den oprindelige frist på to måneder ligeledes forlænges med en ny periode på to måneder efter afgørelse truffet af EDPS, som skal meddeles den registeransvarlige inden udløbet af den oprindelige frist på to måneder.
If the complexity of the matter so requires, the initial two-month period may also be extended for a further two months by decision of the EDPS, which must be notified to the controller prior to the expiry of the initial two month period.
Hvis der ikke er truffet nogen afgørelse ved udløbet af fristen på to måneder eller forlængelsen heraf, anses EDPS’ udtalelse for at være positiv.
If no decision has been delivered at the end of the two-month period or extension thereof, the opinion of the EDPS is deemed to be favourable.
Forordningens artikel 27, stk. 5, bestemmer, at EDPS skal føre et register over alle de behandlinger, der anmeldes til forudgående kontrol. Registret skal indeholde de oplysninger, der er omhandlet i artikel 25, og skal kunne konsulteres af enhver.
Article 27(5) of the regulation provides that the EDPS must keep a register of all processing operations of which he has been notified for prior checking. is register must contain the information referred to in Article 25 and be open to public inspection.
d) Behandlinger, som tager sigte på at udelukke personer fra at udøve en ret, modtage en ydelse eller opnå en kontrakt. Dette kriterium finder typisk anvendelse i forbindelse med udelukkelsessystemer og kan delvis overlappe evalueringssystemer.
(d) Processing operations for the purpose of excluding individuals from a right, benefit or contract. is criterion applies typically to debarment systems and may overlap partially with evaluation systems.
Anmeldelse/høring
Notification/consultation
Den forudgående kontrol foretages af EDPS efter modtagelse af en anmeldelse fra en DPO.
Prior checks must be carried out by the EDPS following receipt of a notification from the DPO.
Erfaringerne har vist, at der med henvisning til artikel 25 er behov for flere oplysninger end dem, der er nævnt i artikel 27, stk. 5, for at have et godt faktuelt grundlag og retsgrundlag til analyse af behandlinger.
Experience has demonstrated that more information than foreseen in Article 27(5), by reference to Article 25, is needed to have a good factual and legal basis to analyse processing operations.
Der er med henblik herpå tilføjet nye oplysningsfelter i formularen. Behovet for at anmode om yderligere oplysninger er dermed undgået, i det omfang det er muligt.
To that effect, new fields of information have been added to the form. e need to request further information is thus avoided as much as possible.
Af hensyn til åbenheden findes alle oplysninger i det offentlige register, undtagen oplysninger om sikkerhedsforanstaltninger, der ikke vil blive nævnt i registret, som kan konsulteres af enhver. Denne begrænsning er i overensstemmelse med forordningens artikel 26, der bestemmer, at det register over behandlinger, der føres af de enkelte DPO’er, skal indeholde de oplysninger, der findes på anmeldelses-
In the interest of transparency, all information is included in the public register, except the security measures, which are not to be mentioned in the register open for public inspection. is restriction is in line with Article 26 of the regulation, which provides that the register of processing operations held by each DPO shall include the information provided in the notification form, except security measures.
Hvis en DPO er i tvivl om nødvendigheden af forudgående kontrol, kan vedkommende også høre EDPS om tilfældet (artikel 27, stk. 3). Denne høringsprocedure har været et grundlæggende værktøj i forbindelse med udviklingen af ovennævnte fortolkningskriterier (artikel 27, stk. 1 og 2).
Should the DPO have any doubts as to the need for prior checking, he or she may also consult the EDPS on the case (Article 27(3)). is consultation procedure has been a fundamental tool in developing the criteria of interpretation of Article 27(1) and (2), mentioned above.
I nogle tilfælde har en DPO sendt en anmeldelse med henblik på forudgående kontrol ud fra en formodning om, at det var nødvendigt af retlige hensyn, men EDPS har konkluderet, at dette ikke var tilfældet (jf. punkt 2.3.3 under udtalelser om sager vedrørende forudgående kontrol afgivet i 2005).
In some cases, the DPO has sent a notification for prior checking assuming that there was a need in the legal sense, but the EDPS concluded that this was not the case (see paragraph 2.3.3, under opinions on priorchecking cases issued in 2005).
Under alle omstændigheder har disse sager sammen med høringer haft stor betydning for præciseringen af kriterierne i forbindelse med forudgående kontrol.
In any event, those cases, together with consultations, have been of great importance in clarifying the criteria for prior checking.
Der er oprettet et workflowsystem for at sikre, at alle henstillinger i forbindelse med et bestemt tilfælde bliver fulgt op, og eventuelt, at alle håndhævelsesafgørelser overholdes (jf. punkt 2.3.7).
A workflow system is in place to make sure that all recommendations in a particular case are followed up and, where applicable, that all enforcement decisions are complied with (see paragraph 2.3.7.)
Når EDPS har afgivet sin udtalelse, indføres udtalelsens reference, sagsnummeret og eventuelle opfølgningsforanstaltninger, der skal træffes (med samme begrænsninger som nævnt ovenfor), i registret.
Once the EDPS has delivered his opinion, the reference to the opinion, the case number and possible follow-up measures to be taken (with the same restrictions as mentioned above) are added to the register.
Senere vil de ændringer, som den registeransvarlige har foretaget efter EDPS’ udtalelse, også blive indført i kortfattet form.
Later on, the changes made by the controller in the light of the EDPS opinion are also given in summary form.
Derved opnås to ting: For det første holdes oplysningerne i en bestemt behandling ajour, og for det andet overholdes princippet om åbenhed.
In this way, two goals are achieved.
Sondring mellem sager vedrørende efterfølgende kontrol og sager vedrørende egentlig forudgående kontrol
On the one hand, the information on a given processing operation is kept up to date and, on the other, the transparency principle is complied with.
Registret vil være tilgængeligt online med anden udgave af webstedet, og såvel anmeldelserne som udtalelserne vil så være tilgængelige.
e register will be available online with the second phase of the website and both the notifications and the opinions issued will then be accessible.
I mellemtiden vil de fleste udtalelser blive anbragt på webstedet, herunder opfølgende noter, der tilføjes, når de registeransvarlige gennemfører henstillinger.
Meanwhile, most opinions are posted on the website, including follow-up notes added when recommendations are implemented by the controllers.
Artikel 50 bestemmer, at Fællesskabets institutioner og organer skal sikre, at en behandling, der allerede var indledt på datoen for forordningens ikrafttræden, bringes i overensstemmelse med forordningen senest et år efter denne dato (dvs. inden den 1. februar 2002). Udnævnelsen af EDPS og den assisterende EDPS trådte i kraft den 17. januar 2004.
Article 50 provides that Community institutions and bodies are to ensure that processing operations already under way on the date the regulation entered into force are brought into conformity with the regulation within one year of that date (i.e. by 1 February 2002). e appointment of the EDPS and the Assistant EDPS entered into effect on 17 January 2004.
Ifølge forordningens artikel 27, stk. 4, har EDPS’ endelige holdning form af en udtalelse, som meddeles den registeransvarlige og DPO’en i den berørte institution eller det berørte organ.
Pursuant to Article 27(4) of the regulation, the final position of the EDPS takes the form of an opinion, to be notified to the controller of the processing operation and to the DPO of the institution or body concerned.
Udtalelser er struktureret som følger: en beskrivelse af behandlingen, et resumé af de faktiske forhold, en juridisk analyse og konklusioner.
Opinions are structured as follows: a description of proceedings; a summary of the facts; a legal analysis; conclusions.
Forudgående kontrol omfatter ikke kun behandlinger, der endnu ikke er indledt (»egentlig« forudgående kontrol), men også behandlinger, der er indledt før den 17. januar 2004, eller før forordningen trådte i kraft (efterfølgende forudgående kontrol).
Prior checks concern not only operations not yet in progress (‘proper’ prior checks), but also processing operations that started before 17 January 2004 or before the regulation came into force (ex-post prior checks).
I sådanne situationer kan kontrol i henhold til artikel 27 strengt taget ikke være »forudgående«, men skal behandles som en efterfølgende kontrol. Med denne pragmatiske tilgang sikrer EDPS, at forordningens artikel 50 overholdes for behandlinger, der indebærer særlige risici.
In such situations, an Article 27 check could not be ‘prior’ in the strict sense of the word, but must be dealt with on an ex post basis.
For at klare ubehandlede sager, der sandsynligvis skal underkastes forudgående kontrol, har EDPS anmodet de enkelte DPO’er om at analysere situationen i deres institution med hensyn til behandlinger i henhold til artikel 27.
In order to deal with the backlog of cases likely to be subject to prior checking, the EDPS requested the DPOs to analyse the situation of their institution concerning processing operations within the scope of Article 27.
Efter modtagelse af alle DPO-bi-dragene udarbejdede EDPS i 2004 en oversigt over sager, der skal underkastes forudgående kontrol. Denne liste blev yderligere udbygget i 2005.
Following the receipt of contributions from all DPOs, a list of cases subject to prior checking was made by the EDPS in 2004. is list was further refined during 2005.
Den juridiske analyse begynder med en undersøgelse af, om et tilfælde kræver, at der skal foretages forudgående kontrol.
e legal analysis starts with an examination of whether the case actually qualifies for prior checking.
Hvis tilfældet ikke hører ind under de tilfælde, der er opført i artikel 27, stk. 2, ser EDPS som nævnt ovenfor på den særlige risiko, der vil kunne opstå for den registreredes rettigheder og frihedsrettigheder.
As mentioned above, if the case does not fall within the scope of the cases listed in Article 27(2), the EDPS will assess the specific risk to rights and freedoms of the data subject.
Hvis tilfældet kræver, at der skal foretages forudgående kontrol, består den centrale del af den juridiske analyse i en undersøgelse af, om behandlingen er i overensstemmelse med forordningens relevante bestemmelser.
Once the case qualifies for prior checking, the core of the legal analysis is an examination of whether the processing operation complies with the relevant provisions of the regulation.
Om nødvendigt fremsættes der henstillinger med henblik på at sikre, at forordningen overholdes.
Where necessary, recommendations are made to the effect of ensuring compliance with the regulation.
EDPS har hidtil kunnet konkludere, at behandlingen ikke synes at indebære en overtrædelse af nogen bestemmelser i forordningen, forudsat at der tages hensyn til de fremsatte henstillinger.
In the conclusion, the EDPS has so far stated that the processing does not seem to involve a breach of any provision of the regulation, provided that the recommendations issued are taken into account.
For ligesom inden for andre områder at sikre, at alle arbejder på det samme grundlag, og at EDPS’ udtalelser vedtages efter en fuldstændig analyse af alle vigtige oplysninger, er der ved at blive udarbejdet en håndbog.
As a result of the inventory, some categories were identified in most institutions and bodies and therefore found suitable for a more systematic supervision. To allow for the most efficient use of the human resources available, the EDPS prioritised the work on ex post priorchecking cases.
Den strukturerer udtalelserne baseret på
In September 2004, by examining the inventory of cases which have to be submitted by the institutions and bodies to the EDPS, three major priorities were established:
Opgørelsen viste, at nogle kategorier var forekommet i de fleste institutioner og organer og derfor egnede sig til et mere systematisk tilsyn.
To guarantee, as in other areas, that the entire team works on the same basis and that the EDPS’s opinions are adopted after a complete analysis of all significant information, a case manual is being drafted.
I september 2004 blev der på baggrund af opgørelsen over sager, som institutionerne og
1. medical files,2. staff appraisal,3. disciplinary procedures.
Årsberetning for 2005 organerne skal forelægge EDPS, fastlagt tre vigtige prioriteter:1. lægejournaler2. personalebedømmelser3. disciplinære procedurer.
ANNUAL REPORT 2005 ant data protection issues. is specific subject will therefore be treated in a paper intended to provide guidelines ensuring that the rights of individuals are duly protected.
EDPS tilføjede to nye prioriteter i anmodningen om en ajourført opgørelse til institutionerne og organerne i november 2005:4. sociale tjenester5. elektronisk overvågning.
e EDPS added two new priorities in the request for an updated inventory to the institutions and bodies in November 2005, namely:4. social services,5. e-monitoring.
Disse prioriteringskriterier gælder kun for sager vedrørende efterfølgende kontrol, da sager vedrørende egentlig forudgående kontrol skal tages op, inden behandlingen foretages, i overensstemmelse med institutionens eller organets planer.
Analysis by institution/body ese prioritisation criteria apply only to ex post cases, as proper priorchecking cases must be dealt with before the processing operation is implemented, following the plans of the institution or body.
Udtalelser om sager vedrørende forudgående kontrol i 2005
Opinions on priorchecking cases issued in 2005
Af disse otte tilfælde angik de fem personlige registre vedrørende personalet.
Most institutions and bodies have notified processing operations likely to present specific risks.
Selv om personaleregistre ikke er underlagt forudgående kontrol, findes de i alle institutioner og organer og giver anledning til vigtige databeskyttelsesspørgsmål. Dette særlige emne vil derfor blive behandlet i et dokument, der skal give retningslinjer, som sikrer, at enkeltpersoners rettigheder beskyttes korrekt.
Whilst updating their inventory of priorchecking cases (in November 2005), the institutions and bodies have had the occasion to analyse in which area notifications are progressing well or are missing.
I 2005, der var det første fulde arbejdsår for EDPS, blev der afgivet 34 udtalelser om sager vedrørende forudgående kontrol:
Only one agency (the OHIM) has notified any cases. e EDPS assumes that many other agencies will notify processing operations in the near future, as some of them are already well on their way to determining their own inventories.
Revisionsretten 5 sager vedr. forudgående kontrol
5 priorchecking cases4 priorchecking cases3 priorchecking cases4 priorchecking cases3 priorchecking cases6 priorchecking cases e number of priorchecking cases dealt with, by category receiving priority, is as follows:
Ved ajourføringen af deres opgørelser over tilfælde med forudgående kontrol (i november 2005) har institutionerne og organerne haft lejlighed til at analysere, på hvilke områder anmeldelserne skrider godt frem, og på hvilke de mangler.
Category 1 (medical files) 9 priorchecking cases Category 2 (staff appraisal) 19 priorchecking cases Category 3 (disciplinary procedures) 6 priorchecking cases Category 4 (social services) none Category 5 (e-monitoring) none
Rådet 4 sager vedr. forudgående kontrol
Regarding Category 1, it includes the medical file itself (one priorchecking case) and all procedures linked to allowances or sickness schemes (eight priorchecking cases).
Den Europæiske Centralbank 3 sager vedr. forudgående kontrol Domstolen 6 sager vedr. forudgående kontrol
Of the 34 priorchecking cases, only four were proper priorchecking cases, i.e. the institutions and bodies concerned (Court of Auditors for three of them and the ECB for the fourth) followed the procedure involved for prior checking before implementing the processing operation. ree of those four priorchecking cases were related to disciplinary procedures and one to evaluation. e remaining 30 were ex post priorchecking cases.
Kun ét agentur (KHIM) har anmeldt tilfælde. EDPS antager, at mange andre agenturer vil anmelde behandlinger i den nærmeste fremtid, da nogle af dem allerede er godt i gang med at udarbejde deres egne opgørelser.
e major category theme remains Category 2, relating to the evaluation of staff (56 % of cases; 19 files out of the 34). e appraisal concerns all staff members of the European Community, including officials, temporary agents and contractual agents.
Det Europæiske Økonomiske og Sociale Udvalg 1 sag vedr. forudgående kontrol
e purpose of evaluation is relevant in a broader sense in that it relates not only to the appraisal itself (for example, Case 2005-218 about the career development review (CDR) system), but also to all processing operations including data which contributed to the evaluation of the data subject in a specific framework (such as the evaluation of the freelance contractors).
Den Europæiske Investeringsbank 4 sager vedr. forudgående kontrol
In addition to these 34 priorchecking cases on which an opinion has been issued, the EDPS has also dealt with eight cases which were found to not be subject to prior checking: two notifications came from the Court of Justice, two from the European Investment Bank, two from the European Ombudsman, one from the Committee of the Regions and one from the Commission.
Europa-Parlamentet 2 sager vedr. forudgående kontrol
Of these eight cases, five dealt with personal files of staff.
Kategori 1 (lægejournaler) 9 tilfælde med forudgående kontrol
Although personal files of staff are not subject to prior checking, they exist in all institutions and bodies and raise import-
Kategori 2 (personalebedømmelser) 19 tilfælde med forudgående kontrol
) Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs).
Ud af de 34 sager vedrørende forudgående kontrol var der kun fire sager, der vedrørte egentlig forudgående kontrol, dvs. at de pågældende institutioner og organer (Revisionsretten for tre af dem og ECB
Regarding the third category (disciplinary procedures), only six files were dealt with. ese processing
Kun ét tilfælde betragtes som ikke hørende under forudgående kontrol.
It is important to underline that 75 % of the proper priorchecking cases relate to disciplinary procedures.
Kommissionen 3 tilfælde med forudgående kontrol
More agencies are expected to take on the issue of data protection in the near future.
Med hensyn til kategori 1 omfatter den selve lægejournalen (ét tilfælde med forudgående kontrol) og alle de procedurer, der er knyttet til godtgørelses- eller sygeforsikringsordninger (otte tilfælde med forudgående kontrol).
Since priority themes four and five were only introduced in November 2005, it stands to reason that no opinions have been issued to date, although some notifications have been received in each category.
Den Europæiske Centralbank 4 tilfælde med forudgående kontrol
Category 1 (medical files) 9 priorchecking cases Category 2 (staff appraisal) 13 priorchecking cases Category 3 (disciplinary procedures) 1 priorchecking case Category 4 (social services) 2 priorchecking cases Category 5 (e-monitoring) 3 priorchecking cases Other areas 1 priorchecking case (7)
Det største kategoriområde er fortsat kategori 2, der vedrører evaluering af personale (56 % af tilfældene; 19 sager ud af 34).
Notifications for prior checking received in 2005, on which opinions are to be issued in 2006
Bedømmelsen vedrører alle typer personale i Det Europæiske Fællesskab, herunder tjenestemænd, midlertidigt ansatte og kontraktansatte.
In Category 1 (medical files) there has been a continuing process of notifications and this is expected to continue in 2006, as many procedures involve medical files.
Domstolen 2 tilfælde med forudgående kontrol
At the end of January 2006, 33 priorchecking cases were already in process.
Den Europæiske Investeringsbank 3 tilfælde med forudgående kontrol
Of these, 29 notifications were sent in 2005 (eight in December) and four were notified in January 2006.
Antallet af anmeldte sager vedrørende forudgående kontrol pr. prioriteret kategori er som følger:
As a background for the prior checking of e-monitoring systems, a paper about e-monitoring is being drafted by the EDPS and will serve as reference for prior checking in this domain (see paragraph 2.7).
De to figurer i bilag D illustrerer arbejdet udført af EDPS og institutionerne og organerne.
e institutions and bodies are continuing to notify to the EDPS, processing operations likely to present specific risks.
De giver en detaljeret oversigt over EDPS’ arbejdsdage, antallet af forlængelsesdage, som EDPS har haft brug for, og antallet af suspensionsdage (tid, der er nødvendig til modtagelse af oplysninger fra institutionerne og organerne).
After having launched the updated inventory (in November 2005), it is noted that numerous notifications were received from some institu-
Kategori 2 (personalebedømmelser) 13 sager vedr. forudgående kontrol
) European Personnel Selection Office (which relies on the
) Det Europæiske Observationscenter for Racisme og Fremmedhad.
DPO of the Commission).) European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia.)
(5) Kontoret for Harmonisering i det Indre Marked (Varemærker og Design).)
Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade
Ved udgangen af januar 2006 var der allerede 33 tilfælde med forudgående kontrol under bearbejdning.
Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union.
Kategori 4 (sociale tjenester) 2 sager vedr. forudgående kontrol somme oplysninger (artikel 10 i forordningen). Der er foretaget en grundig undersøgelse af retsgrundlaget og af det strenge behov for behandling af disse oplysninger.
In this field, both the need for prior checking and the specific conditions relating to the processing of sensitive data apply (Article 10 of the regulation). e legal basis and the strict need for processing those data have been carefully looked into.
Fortroligheden er et andet spørgsmål af yderste vigtighed.
Confidentiality is another crucial concern.
Andre områder 1 sag vedr. forudgående kontrol (
In parallel with the handling of ex post priorchecking cases, four cases of ‘proper’ (8) prior checking were notified to the EDPS in 2005.