natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
That judgment has so far not been published by the Government in the Official Journal, with the consequence that it does not have legal effect.
Ovu odluku vlada dosad nije objavila u Službenom listu, zbog čega ona nema pravni učinak.
On 11 March 2016, the Venice Commission adopted its opinion ‘on amendments to the Act of 25 June 2015 on the Constitutional Tribunal’ [17].
11. ožujka 2016. Venecijanska komisija donijela je mišljenje „o izmjenama Zakona o Ustavnom sudu od 25. lipnja 2015.” [17].
As regards the appointment of judges, the opinion called on the Polish Parliament to find a solution on the basis of the rule of law, respecting the judgments of the Tribunal.
Što se tiče imenovanja sudaca, u mišljenju se poljski parlament poziva da iznađe rješenje na temelju vladavine prava, poštujući odluke Ustavnog suda.
It also considered, inter alia, that a high attendance quorum, the requirement of a two-thirds majority for adopting judgments and a strict rule making it impossible to deal with urgent cases, especially in their combined effect, would have made the Tribunal ineffective.
Među ostalim se smatra da bi kvorum s visokom nazočnošću, potrebna dvotrećinska većina za donošenje odluka te strogo pravilo koje onemogućuje rješavanje žurnih predmeta, naročito njihovim zajedničkim učinkom, učinilo Sud neučinkovitim.
Finally, it considered that a refusal to publish the judgment of 9 March 2016 would further deepen the constitutional crisis in Poland.
Naposljetku, smatra se da bi odbijanje objavljivanja odluke od 9. ožujka 2016. dodatno produbilo ustavnu krizu u Poljskoj.
On 21 March 2016, the Polish Government wrote to the Commission inviting First Vice-President Timmermans to a meeting in Poland to assess the dialogue carried out so far between the Polish Government and the Commission and to determine how to continue it in an impartial, evidence-based and cooperative way.
21. ožujka 2016. poljska vlada uputila je dopis Komisiji pozivajući prvog potpredsjednika Timmermansa na sastanak u Poljsku radi procjene dosad obavljenog dijaloga između poljske vlade i Komisije te radi utvrđivanja kako nastaviti na nepristran način koji se temelji na dokazima i suradnji.
On 31 March 2016, the Polish Government wrote to the Commission with recent information and legal assessments regarding the dispute around the Constitutional Tribunal in Poland.
31. ožujka 2016. poljska vlada uputila je dopis Komisiji s novim informacijama i pravnim procjenama koje se odnose na spor oko Ustavnog suda u Poljskoj.
On 5 April 2016, meetings took place in Warsaw between First Vice-President Timmermans and the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Poland, the Minister of Justice, the Deputy Prime Minister, as well as with the President and the Vice-President of the Constitutional Tribunal.
5. travnja 2016. u Varšavi su održani sastanci prvog potpredsjednika Timmermansa s ministrom vanjskih poslova Poljske, ministrom pravosuđa, zamjenikom premijera, kao i s predsjednikom i potpredsjednikom Ustavnog suda.
Following these meetings, several meetings also took place between the Polish Government, represented by the Ministry of Justice, and the Commission.
Nakon tih sastanaka održano je još nekoliko sastanaka poljske vlade, koju je predstavljalo Ministarstvo pravosuđa, i Komisije.
Following the judgment of 9 March 2016, the Constitutional Tribunal resumed the adjudication of cases.
Slijedom odluke od 9. ožujka 2016. Ustavni sud nastavio je s donošenjem odluka o predmetima.
The Polish Government did not participate in these proceedings and the judgments rendered by the Constitutional Tribunal since 9 March 2016 have so far not been published by the Government in the Official Journal [18].
Poljska vlada nije sudjelovala u tim postupcima i odluke koje je Ustavni sud donio nakon 9. ožujka 2016. vlada dosad nije objavila u Službenom listu [18].
On 13 April 2016, the European Parliament adopted a Resolution on the situation in Poland, inter alia, urging the Polish Government to respect, publish and fully implement without further delay the Constitutional Tribunal's judgment of 9 March 2016 and to implement the judgments of 3 and 9 December 2015, and calling on the Polish Government to fully implement the recommendations of the Venice Commission.
13. travnja 2016. Europski parlament donio je rezoluciju o situaciji u Poljskoj, kojom se, među ostalim, od poljske vlade zahtijeva da poštuje, objavi i u potpunosti provede bez daljnjeg odgađanja odluku Ustavnog suda od 9. ožujka 2016. te da provede odluke od 3. i 9. prosinca 2015., te poziva poljski parlament da u potpunosti provede preporuke Venecijanske komisije.
On 20 April 2016, a meeting took place between the Commission and representatives of the Network of Presidents of Supreme Judicial Courts of the EU and of the Conference of European Constitutional Courts to discuss the situation in Poland.
20. travnja 2016. održan je sastanak Komisije i predstavnika Mreže predsjednika vrhovnih sudova EU-a i Konferencije europskih ustavnih sudova radi raspravljanja o situaciji u Poljskoj.
On 26 April 2016, the General Assembly of the Supreme Court of Poland adopted a resolution attesting that the rulings of the Constitutional Tribunal are valid, even if the Polish Government refuses to publish them in the Official Journal.
26. travnja 2016. Glavna skupština Vrhovnog suda Poljske donijela je rezoluciju potvrđujući da su odluke Ustavnog suda valjane, čak i ako ih poljska vlada odbija objaviti u Službenom listu.
On 29 April 2016, a group of members of the Sejm submitted to the Sejm a legislative proposal for a new Constitutional Tribunal Act with a view to replacing the current Act.
29. travnja 2016. grupa članova Sejma podnijela je Sejmu zakonodavni prijedlog za novi zakon o Ustavnom sudu u namjeri da zamijeni postojeći zakon.
In the course of April an expert group was composed in the Sejm to help prepare a new law on the Constitutional Tribunal.
Tijekom travnja u Sejmu je osnovana stručna skupina kako bi pomogla u pripremi novog zakona o Ustavnom sudu.
On 24 May 2016, First Vice-President Timmermans had meetings in Warsaw with the Prime Minister of Poland, with the President and the Vice-President of the Constitutional Tribunal, with the Ombudsman, with the Mayor of the City of Warsaw and with members of the opposition parties in the Sejm.
24. svibnja 2016. prvi potpredsjednik Timmermans sastao se u Varšavi s premijerkom Poljske, s predsjednikom i potpredsjednikom Ustavnog suda, s ombudsmanom, s gradonačelnikom grada Varšave i s članovima oporbenih stranaka u Sejmu.
On 26 May 2016, First Vice-President Timmermans had a meeting in Brussels with the Deputy Prime Minister of Poland.
26. svibnja 2016. prvi potpredsjednik Timmermans sastao se u Bruxellesu sa zamjenikom premijera Poljske.
Subsequently, further exchanges and meetings took place between the Commission and the Polish government.
Nakon toga su održani daljnji sastanci i razmijenjene informacije između Komisije i poljske vlade.
However, despite the detailed and constructive nature of the exchanges between the Commission and the Polish Government, they were not able to resolve the concerns of the Commission.
Međutim, unatoč detaljnoj i konstruktivnoj prirodi razmijenjenih informacija između Komisije i poljske vlade, time se nije mogla otkloniti zabrinutost Komisije.
On 1 June 2016, the Commission adopted an Opinion concerning the rule of law in Poland.
1. lipnja 2016. Komisija je donijela mišljenje o vladavini prava u Poljskoj.
Following the dialogue that had been ongoing with the Polish authorities since 13 January, the Commission deemed it necessary to formalise its assessment of the current situation in that Opinion.
Slijedom dijaloga koji je bio u tijeku s poljskim vlastima od 13. siječnja Komisija je smatrala potrebnim formalizirati svoju procjenu trenutačne situacije u ovome mišljenju.
The Opinion set out the concerns of the Commission and served to focus the ongoing dialogue with the Polish authorities towards finding a solution.
U mišljenju se utvrđuje zabrinutost Komisije te ono služi za usmjeravanje tekućeg dijaloga s poljskim vlastima prema pronalaženju rješenja.
On 24 June 2016, the Polish Government wrote to the Commission acknowledging receipt of the Commission's Rule of Law Opinion of 1 June [19].
24. lipnja 2016. poljska vlada uputila je dopis Komisiji potvrđujući primitak Mišljenja Komisije o vladavini prava od 1. lipnja [19].
The letter informed the Commission about the state of play of Parliamentary work in Poland including on a new Law on the Constitutional Tribunal, and expressed the conviction that the work undertaken at the Parliament was the right way to reach a constructive solution.
U dopisu je Komisija obaviještena o stanju stvari u parlamentarnom radu u Poljskoj, uključujući o novom zakonu o Ustavnom sudu te je izraženo uvjerenje da je djelovanje poduzeto u parlamentu bio pravi put prema postizanju konstruktivnog rješenja.
Subsequently, the dialogue between the Commission and the Polish Government continued.
Slijedom toga, dijalog između Komisije i poljske vlade je nastavljen.
Poland should duly take into account the Commission's analysis set out hereafter and take the measures figuring in section 6 of this recommendation so that the problems identified are solved within the time limit set.
Poljska treba uzeti u obzir analizu Komisije izloženu dalje u tekstu i poduzeti mjere predočene u odjeljku 6. ove preporuke kako bi se navedeni problemi riješili unutar utvrđenog vremenskog roka.
The present recommendation sets out the concerns of the Commission with regard to the rule of law in Poland and makes recommendations to the Polish authorities on how to address these concerns.
U ovoj se preporuci iznosi zabrinutost Komisije u odnosu na vladavinu prava u Poljskoj i daju preporuke poljskim vlasima o tome kako ukloniti ovu zabrinutost.
These concerns relate to the following issues:
Ova je zabrinutost povezana sa sljedećim pitanjima:
the appointment of judges of the Constitutional Tribunal and the lack of implementation of the judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal of 3 and 9 December 2015 relating to these matters;
imenovanje sudaca Ustavnog suda i neprovedba odluka Ustavnog suda od 3. i 9. prosinca 2015. u pogledu tih predmeta,
the lack of publication in the Official Journal and of implementation of the judgment of 9 March 2016 and of the judgments rendered by the Constitutional Tribunal since 9 March 2016;
neobjavljivanje u Službenom listu i neprovedba odluke od 9. ožujka 2016. te odluka koje je Ustavni sud donio nakon 9. ožujka 2016.,
the effective functioning of the Constitutional Tribunal and the effectiveness of Constitutional review of new legislation, in particular in view of the law on the Constitutional Tribunal adopted by the Sejm on 22 July 2016.
učinkovito funkcioniranje Ustavnog suda i učinkovitost ocjenjivanja ustavnosti novodonesenih zakona, posebno s obzirom na Zakon o Ustavnom sudu koji je Sejm donio 22. srpnja 2016.
APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL
IMENOVANJE SUDACA USTAVNOG SUDA
Ahead of the general elections for the Sejm of 25 October 2015, on 8 October the outgoing legislature nominated five persons to be ‘appointed’ as judges of the Constitutional Tribunal by the President of the Republic.
Prije općih izbora za Sejm 25. listopada 2015., 8. listopada zakonodavna vlast na odlasku predložila je pet osoba koje će predsjednik republike „imenovati” kao suce Ustavnog suda.
Three judges would take seats vacated during the mandate of the outgoing legislature while two would take seats vacated during that of the incoming legislature which commenced on 12 November 2015.
Troje sudaca trebalo je preuzeti mjesta ispražnjena tijekom mandata zakonodavne vlasti na odlasku, dok je dvoje sudaca trebalo preuzeti mjesta ispražnjena tijekom mandata zakonodavne vlasti na dolasku, koja je s radom započela 12. studenoga 2015.
On 19 November 2015, the Sejm, through an accelerated procedure, amended the Law on the Constitutional Tribunal, introducing the possibility to annul the judicial nominations made by the previous legislature and to nominate five new judges.
19. studenoga 2015. Sejm je putem ubrzanoga postupka izmijenio Zakon o Ustavnom sudu, uvodeći mogućnost poništenja prijedloga sudaca koje je predložila prethodna zakonodavna vlast te predlaganja pet novih sudaca.
On 25 November 2015, the Sejm passed a motion annulling the five nominations by the previous legislature and on 2 December nominated five new judges.
25. studenoga 2015. Sejm je izglasao prijedlog o poništavanju pet prijedloga prethodne zakonodavne vlasti i 2. prosinca predložio je pet novih sudaca.
The Constitutional Tribunal was seised concerning the decisions of both the previous legislature and the incoming legislature.
Pred Ustavnim sudom pokrenut je postupak u odnosu na odluke prethodne zakonodavne vlasti i zakonodavne vlasti na dolasku.
The Tribunal consequently delivered two judgments, on 3 and 9 December 2015.
Sud je slijedom toga donio dvije odluke, 3. i 9. prosinca 2015.
The judgment also specifically referred to the obligation for the President of the Republic to immediately take the oath from a judge elected by the Sejm.
Odluka se posebno odnosila na obvezu predsjednika republike da odmah uzme prisegu od suca kojega je Sejm izabrao.
On 9 December [21], the Constitutional Tribunal, inter alia, invalidated the legal basis for the nominations by the new legislature of the Sejm of the three judges for the vacancies opened up on 6 November 2015 for which the previous legislature had already lawfully nominated judges.
9. prosinca [21] Ustavni je sud, među ostalim, poništio pravnu osnovu po kojoj nova zakonodavna vlast Sejma može predložiti troje sudaca za mjesta ispražnjena 6. studenoga 2015., a za koje je prethodna zakonodavna vlast već predložila suce na zakonit način.
Despite these judgments, the three judges nominated by the previous legislature have not taken up their function of judge in the Constitutional Tribunal and their oath has not yet been taken by the President of the Republic.
Usprkos tim odlukama, troje sudaca koje je predložila prethodna zakonodavna vlast nije preuzelo svoju dužnost suca u Ustavnom sudu niti su položili prisegu pred predsjednikom republike.
Conversely, the oath of the three judges nominated by the new legislature without a valid legal basis has been taken by the President of the Republic.
Naprotiv, prisegu pred predsjednikom republike položilo je troje sudaca koje je bez pravne osnove predložila nova zakonodavna vlast.
The two judges elected by the new legislature replacing the two judges outgoing in December 2015 have in the meantime taken up their function of judge in the Constitutional Tribunal.
Dvoje sudaca koje je izabrala nova zakonodavna vlast da zamijene dvoje sudaca na odlasku u prosincu 2015. u međuvremenu je preuzelo svoju dužnost suca u Ustavnom sudu.
On 28 April 2016, the President of the Republic took the oath of a new judge in the Constitutional Tribunal, nominated by the Sejm to fill a vacancy created earlier that month to replace a judge whose term in the Constitutional Tribunal had ended.
28. travnja 2016. predsjednik republike uzeo je prisegu novoga suca Ustavnog suda, kojeg je predložio Sejm kako bi popunio mjesto ispražnjeno ranije tog mjeseca i zamijenio suca čiji je mandat u Ustavnom sudu istekao.
On 22 July 2016, the Sejm adopted a new Law on the Constitutional Tribunal.
22. srpnja 2016. Sejm je donio novi zakon o Ustavnom sudu.
Article 90 of this Law states that ‘With effect from this Act's entry into force, the President of the Tribunal shall include on panels ruling on cases, and assign cases to, judges of the Tribunal who have taken the oath before the President of the Republic but, by the date of this Act's entry into force, had yet to take up their duties as judges.’ Article 6(7) of the new Law stipulates that ‘After taking the oath, judges shall present themselves at the Tribunal to take up their duties, and the President of the Tribunal shall assign them cases and create conditions enabling them to perform their duties’.
U članku 90. tog zakona navodi se da „od trenutka stupanja ovog zakona na snagu, predsjednik Ustavnog suda uključuje u vijeća koja donose odluke u predmetima suce te dodjeljuje predmete sucima Ustavnog suda koji su prisegnuli pred predsjednikom republike, ali danom stupanja ovog zakona na snagu još uvijek nisu preuzeli svoje dužnosti sudaca”. Članak 6. stavak 7. ovog zakona propisuje da „nakon davanja prisege, suci na Sudu preuzimaju svoje dužnosti, a predsjednik Ustavnog suda dodjeljuje im predmete i stvara uvjete kako bi im omogućio izvršavanje njihovih dužnosti”.
The Commission considers that the binding and final judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal of 3 and 9 December 2015 have still not been implemented as far as the appointment of judges is concerned.
Komisija smatra da obvezujuće i konačne odluke Ustavnog suda od 3. i 9. prosinca 2015. još uvijek nisu provedene što se tiče imenovanja sudaca.
These judgments require that the State institutions of Poland cooperate loyally in order to ensure, in accordance with the rule of law, that the three judges that have been nominated by the previous legislature of the Sejm can take up their function of judge in the Constitutional Tribunal, and that the three judges nominated by the new legislature without a valid legal basis do not take up this function.
Tim se odlukama od državnih institucija Poljske zahtijeva da lojalno surađuju kako bi osigurale, u skladu s vladavinom prava, da troje sudaca koje je predložila prethodna zakonodavna vlast Sejma mogu preuzeti svoju dužnost suca u Ustavnom sudu, a da troje sudaca koje je nova zakonodavna vlast predložila bez valjane pravne osnove ne preuzmu tu dužnost.
The fact that these judgments have not been implemented raises serious concerns in regard of the rule of law, as compliance with final court judgments is an essential requirement inherent in the rule of law.
Činjenica da te odluke još uvijek nisu provedene izaziva ozbiljnu zabrinutost u pogledu vladavine prava, budući da je usklađenost s konačnim sudskim odlukama neophodan uvjet neodvojiv od vladavine prava.
In one of its letters the Polish Government has referred to the existence of a constitutional custom in Poland regarding the nomination of judges which would justify the position taken by the new legislature of the Sejm.
U jednom od dopisa poljska vlada upućuje na postojanje ustavnog običaja u Poljskoj u pogledu imenovanja sudaca koji bi opravdali stav koji je zauzela nova zakonodavna vlast Sejma.
The Commission notes however, as did the Venice Commission [22], that it is for the Constitutional Tribunal to interpret and apply the national constitutional law and custom, and that the Constitutional Tribunal did not refer to such a custom in its judgments.
Međutim, Komisija napominje, kao što je napomenula i Venecijanska komisija [22], da je na Ustavnom sudu da tumači i primjenjuje državni ustavni zakon i običaj te da Ustavni sud u svojim odlukama nije upućivao na takav običaj.
The judgment of 3 December which has validated the legal basis for the nominations of the three judges by the previous Sejm for the posts which became vacant on 6 November cannot be overturned by invoking a supposed constitutional custom which the Tribunal has not recognized.
Odluka od 3. prosinca kojom je potvrđena pravna osnova za predlaganje troje sudaca u prethodnom Sejmu za mjesta koja su postala ispražnjena 6. studenoga ne može se poništiti pozivajući se na navodni ustavni običaj koji Sud nije priznao.
Also, limiting the impact of these judgments to a mere obligation for the Government to publish them, as put forward by the Polish authorities, would deny any legal and operational effect of the judgments of 3 and 9 December.
Nadalje, ograničavanjem utjecaja tih odluka tek na obvezu vlade da ih objavi, kako su iznijele poljske vlasti, osporio bi se svaki pravni i radni učinak odluka od 3. i 9. prosinca.
In particular, it denies the obligation of the President of the Republic to take the oath of the judges in question, which has been confirmed by the Constitutional Tribunal.
Posebno je osporena obveza predsjednika republike da uzme prisegu dotičnih sudaca koje je potvrdio Ustavni sud.
The Commission furthermore notes that also the Venice Commission considers that a solution to the current conflict over the composition of the Constitutional Tribunal ‘must be based on the obligation to respect and fully implement the judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal’ and ‘therefore calls on all State organs and notably the Sejm to fully respect and implement the judgments’ [23].
Komisija nadalje napominje da i Venecijanska komisija smatra da rješenje postojećeg sukoba oko sastava Ustavnog suda „mora biti temeljeno na obvezi poštovanja i potpune provedbe odluka Ustavnog suda” te „stoga poziva državne organe, a ponajprije Sejm da u potpunosti poštuju i provedu te odluke” [23].
Finally, as regards the law adopted on 22 July 2016 on the Constitutional Tribunal the Commission observes that this law is not compatible with the judgments of 3 and 9 December.
Naposljetku, što se tiče Zakona o Ustavnom sudu donesenog 22. srpnja 2016. Komisija primjećuje da taj zakon nije u skladu s odlukama od 3. i 9. prosinca.
Article 90 and Article 6(7) require the President of the Constitutional Tribunal to assign cases to all judges who have taken the oath before the President of the Republic but have not yet taken up their duties as judges.
Člankom 90. i člankom 6. stavkom 7. zahtijeva se da predsjednik Ustavnog suda dodjeljuje predmete svim sucima koji su položili prisegu pred predsjednikom republike, ali nisu još preuzeli svoje dužnosti sudaca.
These provisions are therefore contrary to the judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal of 3 and 9 December 2015 and the opinion of the Venice Commission.
Te su odredbe stoga suprotne odlukama Ustavnog suda od 3. i 9. prosinca 2015. i mišljenju Venecijanske komisije.
The relevant provisions of the law adopted on 22 July 2016 on the Constitutional Tribunal are contrary to the judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal of 3 and 9 December 2015 and to the opinion of the Venice Commission and raise serious concerns in respect of the rule of law.
Odgovarajuće odredbe Zakona o Ustavnom sudu donesenog 22. srpnja 2016. u suprotnosti su s odlukama Ustavnog suda od 3. i 9. prosinca 2015. i s mišljenjem Venecijanske komisije te izazivaju ozbiljnu zabrinutost u pogledu vladavine prava.
LACK OF PUBLICATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL JUDGMENT OF 9 MARCH 2016 AND OF THE JUDGMENTS RENDERED SINCE 9 MARCH 2016
NEOBJAVLJIVANJE I NEPROVEDBA ODLUKE USTAVNOG SUDA OD 9. OŽUJKA 2016. I ODLUKA DONESENIH NAKON 9. OŽUJKA 2016.
On 22 December 2015, following an accelerated procedure, the Sejm amended the Law on the Constitutional Tribunal [24].
22. prosinca 2015., nakon ubrzanog postupka, Sejm je izmijenio Zakon o Ustavnom sudu [24].
The amendments are set out in more detail below in section 4.1.
Te su izmjene detaljnije izložene u nastavku u odjeljku 4.1.
In its judgment of 9 March 2016, the Constitutional Tribunal declared unconstitutional the law adopted on 22 December 2015 in its entirety as well as specific provisions thereof.
U odluci od 9. ožujka 2016. Ustavni sud je proglasio neustavnim zakon donesen 22. prosinca 2015. u cijelosti, kao i njegove posebne odredbe.
So far the Polish authorities have failed to publish the judgment in the Official Journal.
Poljske vlasti dosad tu odluku nisu objavile u Službenom listu.
The Polish Government contests the legality of the judgment, as the Constitutional Tribunal did not apply the procedure foreseen by the law adopted on 22 December 2015.
Poljska vlada osporava zakonitost odluke, budući da Ustavni sud nije primijenio postupak predviđen zakonom donesenim 22. prosinca 2015.
The same position is taken by the Government towards the judgments rendered by the Tribunal after 9 March 2016.
Vlada zauzima isti stav prema odlukama koje je Ustavni sud donio nakon 9. ožujka 2016.
The Commission considers that the judgment of 9 March 2016 is binding and must be respected.
Komisija smatra da je odluka od 9. ožujka 2016. obvezujuća i potrebno ju je poštovati.