natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Though in most cases these questions could be answered, in some cases either: (a) no answer was received, (b) the answers could not be given as the case was still ongoing, or (c) some replies did not directly respond to the questionnaire.
Enamikul juhtudel oli küll võimalik vastused saada, kuid mõnel juhul a) ei saadud vastust, b) ei olnud võimalik vastata, sest asi ei olnud lõpetatud, või c) mõned vastused ei haakunud otseselt küsimustikuga.
In total more than 60 usable answers were received.
Kokku saadi üle 60 kasutuskõlbliku vastuse.
Due to the limited response, it is impossible to derive any valid statistical significance from the exercise and, of course, the methodology in itself contains an element of uncertainty.
Vastuste piiratuse tõttu ei ole küsitluse tulemustele võimalik mingit statistilist tähtsust omistada ning ka metoodika sisaldab ebakindluse elementi.
However, even with these reservations and without over-interpretation of the answers, some trends may be drawn from the results of the exercise:
Kuid isegi nende reservatsioonidega arvestades ning vastuseid ülemääraselt tõlgendamata on küsitluse tulemuste põhjal võimalik välja tuua mõningad tendentsid.
As to the quality of the assistance requested and executed: 50 respondents (89%) found the quality very satisfactory and 6 respondents (11%) found the quality unsatisfactory.
Taotletud ja saadud abi kvaliteedi osas pidas kvaliteeti väga rahuldavaks 50 vastajat (89%) ning mitterahuldavaks 6 vastajat (11%). %).
With regard to the length of the period of time between the request to Eurojust and the execution of the action in the requested state, the picture is much the same, with 56 replies (88%) of very satisfactory and 8 replies (12%) of unsatisfactory.
Mis puudutab Eurojustile taotluse esitamise ning taotluses osutatud riigis toimingu sooritamise vahelist aega, on pilt küllaltki sarnane: 56 vastajat (88%) pidas tulemust väga rahuldavaks ja
As to the availability and service offered by Eurojust, satisfaction seems widespread, with 93% of respondents satisfied and only 7% unsatisfied.
Rahulolu Eurojusti pakutava teenuse ja selle kättesaadavusega on valdav: 93% vastajatest on rahul ja vaid 7% rahulolematud.
As to whether the goals were achieved in the individual case, the picture more or less corresponds.
Küsimuse osas, kas konkreetses kriminaalasjas saavutati soovitud tulemused, on pilt enam- vähem sarnane.
(90% and 10%, respectively).
Eesmärgid saavutati 54 asjas ning neid ei saavutatud 6 asjas (vastavalt 90% % ja 10%). %).
It was encouraging to note that all respondents said that they would certainly (58) or probably
Julgustav oli märkida, et kõik vastajad olid valmis Eurojusti kas kindlasti (58) või tõenäoliselt
(4) use Eurojust again.
(4) ka tulevikus kasutama.
Nearly half of the respondents (25 of 58) did not give feedback to Eurojust on the outcome of their cases.
Peaaegu pooled vastajad (58st 25) ei andnud Eurojustile tagasisidet oma kriminaalasjade tulemuste kohta.
This figure corresponds to the experience of National Members who often encounter difficulty in obtaining specific feedback on the outcome of the assistance given by Eurojust.
See näitaja vastab liikmesriikide liikmete kogemustele; neil on sageli raskusi konkreetse tagasiside saamisega Eurojusti antud abi tulemuste kohta.
It is meaningless to divide these results into the various types of assistance which Eurojust renders.
Nende tulemuste jaotamine Eurojusti osutatavate erinevate abiliikide lõikes on mõttetu.
The figures are so small that they are not significant.
Arvud on nii väikesed, et neid ei saa lugeda oluliseks.
Some trends may, however, be identified.
Täheldada võib aga mõningaid tendentse.
Satisfaction seems widespread.
Rahulolu näib olevat valdav.
There is room for improvement but overall satisfaction levels stand at about 90%.
Arenguruumi on, kuid üldine rahulolu tase on umbes 90%. %.
Satisfaction does not vary significantly with the type of assistance provided by Eurojust, be it co-ordination, cooperation, information exchange or support to national authorities.
Rahulolu ei olene oluliselt sellest, mis liiki abi Eurojust osutas: koordineerimine, koostöö, teabevahetus või liikmesriigi asutuste abistamine.
Only one type of assistance differs and that is assistance due to absence of response to an MLA request.
Erandiks on vaid üks abi liik ja see on vastastikuse õigusabi palve täitmata jätmisest tingitud abi.
The goals were only achieved in two out of five cases.
Eesmärgid saavutati vaid kahel juhtumil viiest.
A probable explanation is that Eurojust is sometimes asked to speed up the execution of MLA requests when all other channels have failed and consequently often endeavouring to resolve a case that has been a lost cause from the outset.
Tõenäoliselt võib seda seletada asjaoluga, et Eurojustil palutakse mõnikord kiirendada vastastikuse õigusabi taotluste täitmist, kui mitte ükski muu kanal ei ole tulemusi andnud ning sellistel juhtudel püütakse sageli lahendada kriminaalasja, mille lahendamine on algusest peale lootusetu.
As we have mentioned, this survey was only a rough attempt to evaluate the output of Eurojust’s casework.
Nagu mainitud, oli küsimustiku näol tegemist vaid kohmaka katsega hinnata Eurojusti tegevuse tulemust kriminaalasjades.
A new and more refined exercise should be made, with the hope of gaining a more scientific and statistically significant response that can be used to improve the quality of the service we offer in specific circumstances as well as more generally.
Teaduslikumate ja statistiliselt olulisemate andmete saamiseks tuleb teostada uus ja täpsem uuring, et andmeid saaks kasutada nii meie teenuste üldise kvaliteedi kui ka konkreetsete teenusliikide kvaliteedi parandamiseks.
Report
Aastaaruanne
TABlE OF COnTEnTS
SISUKORD
List of abbreviations ...........................................................................................................5 foreWorD .................................................................................................................................6
Kasutatavad lühendid ..........................................................................................................5 eessõna .....................................................................................................................................6
1 GeneraL information on activities anD manaGement ................................................9
1 tegevuse ja juhtimise üldinfo ........................................................................................9
Operational activities .....................................................................................................................................................9 Relations with States and organisations outside the European Union ....................................................................................9Administrative issues ...................................................................................................................................................11 Information technology ................................................................................................................................................11Public access to Eurojust documents ..............................................................................................................................12
Operatiivtöö ..................................................................................................................................................................9 Suhted Euroopa Liidu väliste riikide ja organisatsioonidega .................................................................................................9Haldusküsimused ........................................................................................................................................................11 Infotehnoloogia ...........................................................................................................................................................11Avalikkuse ligipääs Eurojusti dokumentidele ....................................................................................................................12
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................14Evaluation of casework, general trends and issues ...........................................................................................................14
Sissejuhatus ............................................................................................................................................................... 14 Kriminaalasjades tehtud töö, üldsuundumuste ja probleemide hindamine ............................................................................14
Terrorism ........................................................................................................................................................17Drug trafficking ...............................................................................................................................................19THB ...............................................................................................................................................................21 Fraud .............................................................................................................................................................21Corruption ......................................................................................................................................................24Cybercrime .....................................................................................................................................................25Money laundering ............................................................................................................................................26Other activities related to the presence of OCGs in the economy ...........................................................................29European Arrest Warrants ................................................................................................................................31Joint Investigation Teams .................................................................................................................................34
Terrorism ........................................................................................................................................................17Narkokaubandus ..............................................................................................................................................19Inimkaubandus ...............................................................................................................................................20 Pettused .........................................................................................................................................................21Korruptsioon ...................................................................................................................................................24Küberkuritegevus ............................................................................................................................................25Rahapesu .......................................................................................................................................................25Kuritegelike ühenduste seotus majandustegevusega .............................................................................................28Euroopa vahistamismäärused ............................................................................................................................30Ühised uurimisrühmad .....................................................................................................................................33
European Judicial network ............................................................................................................................................36Europol ....................................................................................................................................................................... 37 OlAF ..........................................................................................................................................................................
Euroopa õigusalase koostöö võrgustik ............................................................................................................................36Europol .......................................................................................................................................................................37OLAF .......................................................................................................................................................................... 39 Frontex ......................................................................................................................................................................39CEPOL .......................................................................................................................................................................40
4 impLementation of neW eUrojUst Decision ...............................................................42
4 uue eurojusti otsuse raKendamine .............................................................................42
Activities of the Informal Working Group ........................................................................................................................42Internal implementation at Eurojust ...............................................................................................................................43
Mitteametliku töörühma tegevus ...................................................................................................................................42Eurojusti-sisene rakendamine .......................................................................................................................................43
5 foLLoW-Up to coUnciL concLUsions .............................................................................44 anneX ...................................................................................................................................................................50
5 nõuKogu järelduste alusel võetud meetmed ............................................................44 anneX ...................................................................................................................................................................50
Figure 1: Case evolution ............................................................................................................................................50Figure 2: General case classification ............................................................................................................................51Figure 3: Priority crime types in Eurojust cases .............................................................................................................52Figure 4: Priority crime types and other crime types in Eurojust cases .............................................................................53Figure 5: Eurojust cases, requesting countries ..............................................................................................................54 Figure 6: Eurojust cases, requested countries ...............................................................................................................55Figure 7: Total number of coordination meetings .........................................................................................................56Figure 8: Coordination meetings, requesting countries .................................................................................................57Figure 9: Coordination meetings, requested countries ..................................................................................................58
1. joonis: Kriminaalasjade arv .....................................................................................................................................502. joonis: Kriminaalasjade üldine liigitus .......................................................................................................................513. joonis: Prioriteetsed kuriteoliigid Eurojusti kriminaalasjades ........................................................................................524. joonis: Prioriteetsed kuriteoliigid ja muud kuriteoliigid Eurojusti kriminaalasjades ...........................................................535. joonis: Taotlejariigid Eurojusti kriminaalasjades .........................................................................................................54 6. joonis: Taotlusi saanud riigid Eurojusti kriminaalasjades .............................................................................................557. joonis: Koordineerimisnõupidamiste üldarv ................................................................................................................568. joonis: Koordineerimisnõupidamisi taotlenud riigid .....................................................................................................579. joonis: Koordineerimisnõupidamistele kutsutud riigid .................................................................................................58
lIST OF ABBREVATIOnS
KASUTATAvAD LÜHENDID
I am pleased to present Eurojust’s eighth annual report, which reviews our activities in 2009.
On heameel esitleda Eurojusti kaheksandat aastaaruannet, mis võtab kokku meie 2009. aasta tegevuse.
It highlights aspects of the work undertaken by Eurojust in its mission to help fight serious crime affecting two or more Member States of the European Union.
Aruandes kirjeldatakse Eurojusti töö eri aspekte võitluses mitut Euroopa Liidu liikmesriiki puudutavate raskete kuritegude vastu.
2009 brought important changes to the environment in which Eurojust operates.
Eurojusti tegevuskeskkonnas toimus 2009. aastal olulisi muutusi.
The lisbon Treaty entered into force, the Stockholm Programme was adopted and a new Eurojust Decision was published.
Jõustus Lissaboni leping, võeti vastu Stockholmi programm ning avaldati uus Eurojusti otsus.
Work continued to ensure that Eurojust meet the challenges of this new environment, including the possibility of establishing a European Public Prosecutor’s Office from Eurojust.
Jätkus töö Eurojusti suutlikkuse kindlustamiseks uute väljakutsete tingimustes, sealhulgas arutelu Eurojusti baasil Euroopa prokuratuuri loomise võimalikkusest.
Changes designed for operational effectiveness marked the year.
Aastat iseloomustasid ümberkorraldused operatiivtöö efektiivsuse suurendamiseks.
In particular, the new Eurojust Decision gives a central place to strengthening our casework capacities.
Eelkõige uus Eurojusti otsus seab tähelepanu keskpunkti võimekuse tugevdamise kriminaalasjades.
The Decision makes new powers available to Eurojust; information flows and coordination with national authorities are facilitated; the 24/7 nature of Eurojust’s work is put on a formal basis; and Eurojust will host the Secretariat of the network for Joint Investigation Teams and other network secretariats.
Otsus pakub Eurojustile uusi tegutsemisvõimalusi: soodustab infovahetust ja koordineerimist riikide ametiasutustega, loob ametliku aluse Eurojusti ööpäevaringseks puhkepäevadeta tööks ning toob ühiste uurimisrühmade võrgustiku ja teiste võrgustike sekretariaadid Eurojusti juurde.
The operational emphasis was accompanied, as in previous years, by a substantial increase in the number of cases that Member States referred to Eurojust.
Operatiivtöö edendamisega kaasnes – nagu varasematelgi aastatel – liikmesriikidest Eurojustile saadetud kriminaalasjade arvu märkimisväärne kasv.
There was a 15 per cent rise in caseload compared to the preceding year, with almost 1,400 new cases registered on Eurojust’s Case Management System.
Eelmise aastaga võrreldes suurenes kriminaalasjade arv 15 protsendi võrra ning Eurojusti kriminaalasjade haldamise süsteemi kanti ligi 1400 uut asja.
Cooperation beyond the immediate boundaries of the European Union was strengthened by the appointment of a liaison prosecutor from Croatia to join colleagues from norway and the USA.
Euroopa Liidu välispiire ületavat koostööd tugevdas Horvaatia sideprokuröri ametissemääramine, kes asub tööle koos Norra ja USA kolleegidega.
Eurojust continued to seek ways to improve the management of its work.
Eurojust jätkas võimaluste otsimist oma tegevuse paremaks haldamiseks.
An Organisational Structure Review was started to see how Eurojust could function more efficiently.
Alustati organisatsiooni struktuuri läbivaatamisest, selleks et uurida Eurojusti töö tõhustamise viise.
On the domestic front, negotiations continued about new premises, which would allow us to work in one building rather than two as at present.
Asutusesisesel rindel jätkati läbirääkimisi uute ruumide üle, mis võimaldaksid meil töötada praeguse kahe hoone asemel ühes hoones.
In May 2009, a new Administrative Director, Hans Jahreiss, was appointed.
Mais 2009 nimetati ametisse uus haldusdirektor Hans Jahreiss.
In December, José luís lopes da Mota, then President and long-serving national Member for Portugal, resigned.
Detsembris astus tagasi tollane president ja pikaajaline Eurojusti Portugali liige José Luís Lopes da Mota.
Elections for a new President were held in February 2010.
Uue presidendi valimised toimusid veebruaris 2010.
Following a Council recommendation, this year’s Annual Report focuses on Eurojust’s operational work in the light of EU priorities regarding the fight against serious and organised crime.
vastavalt nõukogu soovitusele keskendub tänavune aastaaruanne Eurojusti operatiivtööle, lähtudes ELi prioriteetidest raskete kuritegude ja organiseeritud kuritegevuse vastases võitluses.
On the basis of work undertaken in 2009, Eurojust is confident that it can maintain and improve its contribution to meeting those priorities.
2009. aasta töötulemused annavad Eurojustile kindluse jätkata panuse andmist nende prioriteetide saavutamisse ning oma panust suurendada.
Eurojust College of National Members, February 2010
Eurojusti liikmesriikide liikmete kolleegium, veebruar 2010
GEnERAl InFORMATIOn On ACTIVITIES AnD MAnAGEMEnT
TEgEvUSE JA JUHTIMISE ÜLDINFO
1 General information on activities and management
1 Tegevuse ja juhtimise üldinfo
Operational activities and coordination meetings are provided in the annex.
Operatiivtöö misnõupidamiste täpsem statistika on ära toodud lisas.
Following the priorities set by the Council, Eurojust focused on the fight against terrorism, drug trafficking, trafficking in human beings, fraud, corruption, cybercrime, money laundering and other activities related to the presence of organised crime groups in the economy.
2009. aastal hindas Eurojust esmakordselt ühiste uurimisrühmade taotlusi ja haldas komisjoni poolt neile antud rahaeraldisi. Uue Eurojusti otsuse ellurakendamisega tuuakse ühiste uurimisrühmade sekretariaat üle Eurojusti juurde.
For the first time, Eurojust evaluated applications and administered Commission funding for JITs during 2009.
Nõukogu seatud prioriteete järgides keskendus Eurojust võitlusele terrorismi, narkokaubanduse, inimkaubanduse, pettuste, korruptsiooni, küberkuritegevuse, rahapesu ning kuritegelike ühenduste muu majanduses osalemisega seotud tegevuse vastu.
Following the implementation of the new Eurojust Decision, Eurojust will host the Secretariat of the network for Joint Investigation Teams.
Suhted Euroopa Liidu väliste riikide ja organisatsioonidega
The number of cases referred to Eurojust by the Member States increased by 15 per cent over 2008 to 1,372 cases in 2009.
Liikmesriikidest Eurojustile saadetud kriminaalasjade arv kasvas 2008. aastaga võrreldes 15 protsenti, jõudes 2009. aastal 1372-ni.