natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This lack of differentiation also marks, among other things, the uncertain status of the legal regulations of international law in the legal systems of these countries. 
Tu nediferenciranost, između ostaloga, označava i neodređeni status pravnih pravila međunarodnog prava u nacionalnim pravnim poretcima tih država.
Irrespective of whether this kind of approach derives from the legal tradition and culture of socialist law that promoted a dualistic approach in the relations of national and international law (Balas) or from the idea that the integration process can be mastered by the application of existing constitutional standards, as in Italy, which considered that existing constitutional provisions were sufficient for the ratification of Maastricht, most transitional countries have been faced with a common problem that could be described as a gap between the demands of the integration process and the rigidity of their constitutional models and traditions. 
Bez obzira na to proizlazi li takav pristup iz pravne tradicije i kulture socijalističkog prava koje je promicalo dualistički pristup u odnosima nacionalnoga i međunarodnog prava (Balaš) ili shvaćanja da se integracijski proces može svladati primjenom postojećih ustavnih normi, kao u Italiji koja je smatrala da su važeće ustavne odredbe bile dovoljne za ratifikaciju ugovora iz Maastrichta, većina tranzicijskih država susrela se sa zajedničkim problemom koji bi se mogao opisati kao jaz između zahtjeva integracijskog procesa i rigidnosti njihovih ustavnih modela i tradicije.
In other words, while the constitutional frameworks of EU states members have adapted to the relations of interdependence and gone through a process termed a constitutional revolution by Joseph Weiler (Weiler, 1991; 2403) the legal and constitutional systems of the applicant countries, or potential applicants, have remained more or less unchanged and thus are insensitive to the demands that are being made by European integration. 
Drugim riječima, dok su se ustavni okviri država članica EU prilagođivali odnosima međuovisnosti i prošli kroz proces koji je Joseph Weiler nazvao ustavnom revolucijom (Weiler: 1991; 2403) ustavni i pravni sustavi država kandidatkinja odnosno potencijalnih kandidatkinja ostali su manje-više nepromijenjeni i stoga neosjetljivi na zahtjeve koje postavlja integracija s EU.
For all the states that entered into the type of treaty relationship with the EU described, the association agreement has meant much more than any other treaty in international law. 
Za sve države koje su ušle u navedeni tip ugovornih odnosa s EU ugovor o pridruživanju značio je mnogo više od bilo kojeg drugog ugovora međunarodnog prava.
In terms of their complexity and the nature of the obligations assumed, association agreements are a draft for an all-embracing social, economic and legal transformation, and hence permeate the totality of the social reality of the states parties. 
Po svojoj složenosti i naravi preuzetih obveza ugovori o pridruživanju nacrt su sveobuhvatne gospodarske, socijalne i pravne preobrazbe, te kao takvi prožimaju ukupnost društvene zbilje država stranaka.
Croatia will endeavour to ensure the gradual harmonisation of existing laws and any future legislation with the legal patrimony of the Community (the acquis).” 
Hrvatska će nastojati osigurati postupno usklađivanje postojećih zakona i budućega zakonodavstva s pravnom stečevinom Zajednice (acquis)."
In the area of law, the obligations assumed pursuant to the SAA include the obligation to carry out complex and radical constitutional and legal reforms. 
U području prava, obveze preuzete na temelju sporazuma o pridruživanju obvezuju na provedbu složene i korjenite ustavne i pravne reforme.
As Chris Patten recently said, speaking of SAAs in general: “These treaties are legally binding agreements. 
Kako je nedavno rekao g. Chriss Patten govoreći o sporazumima o stabilizaciji i pridruživanju, “Ti su ugovori pravno obvezatni sporazumi.
They prescribe rights and transfer rights to the states they refer to. 
Oni propisuju obveze i prenose prava na države na koje se odnose.
These are strict agreements, because they include the fundamental principles that are the foundation for membership in the EU - free trade with the EU and the associated disciplines, the principles of market competition and the rules about state aid, rights of intellectual property and so on”.iii 
Ti su strogi ugovori zbog toga što uključuju temeljna načela koja su temelj za članstvo u EU - slobodnu trgovinu s EU te povezane discipline, načela tržišne utakmice i pravila o državnim subvencijama, pravo intelektualnog vlasništva, itd.”iii
Apart from the need for the fulfilment of the material provisions of the association agreement, it is also necessary to carry out a reform to be able to create an interface between national and European law, to open up the legal systems of the application countries for the application of the supranational, European legal sources. 
Osim potrebe za ispunjenjem materijalnih odredaba sporazuma o pridruživanju, potrebno je provesti reformu koja bi stvorila sučelje između nacionalnoga i europskog prava, te koja bi pravne sustave država kandidatkinja otvorila za primjenu nadnacionalih, europskih, pravnih izvora.
This kind of interface should give legal definition to the status of European law in the national legal system, and allow for direct implantation of Community law and “association law”, i.e., law that is based directly or indirectly on the SAA. 
Takvo sučelje trebalo bi pravno urediti status europskoga prava u nacionalnom pravnom poretku, te omogućiti izravnu primjenu prava Zajednice i “asocijacijskog prava”, tj. prava koje se izravno ili posredno temelji na sporazumu o pridruživanju.
There are at least two additional elements of such an interface, which we shall not embark on in detail here. 
Postoje još najmanje dva dodatna elementa takvog sučelja o kojima ovdje nećemo otvarati detaljniju raspravu.
These are the constitutional basis for association with/accession to the EU, and an appropriate and effective national institutional framework making it possible to run an effective integration policy, which implies the need to create a proEurope consensus to facilitate the accomplishment of the other aims stated. 
To je ustavna osnova za pridruživanje/pristupanje EU, te prikladan i učinkovit nacionalni institucionalni okvir koji omogućuje vođenje učinkovite integracijske politike, što podrazumijeva potrebu za stvaranjem proeuropskog konsenzusa koji omogućuje ostvarenje navednih ciljeva.
Applicant countries have addressed these problems in different ways, and there are considerable differences in the provisions concerning the status of treaties in their legal systems. 
Države kandidatkinje tim su problemima prišle na različit način, te se i odredbe o pravnom statusu međunarodnih ugovora u njihovim pravnim sustavima znatno razlikuju.
However, these constitutions say nothing of the direct implementation of treaties. 
Međutim, spomenuti ustavi ne govore ništa o mogućnosti izravne primjene međunarodnih ugovora.
Nevertheless, the possibility of the direct application of treaties does exist in Croatia, and sometimes the Croatian courts will allow them to have immediate effect. 
Ipak, mogućnost izravne primjene međunarodnih ugovora u Hrvatskoj postoji, te im hrvatski sudovi pokatkad priznaju izravne učinke.
Such a diversity of constitutional solutions should not be surprising in the light of the fact that even within the EU the states members have various different approaches to the status of the legal regulations of international law. 
Takva različitost ustavnih rješenja ne iznenađuje u svjetlu činjenice da čak i unutar EU pojedine države članice imaju različit pristup statusu pravnih pravila međunarodnoga prava.
Thus the UK accepts a pronouncedly dualistic concept, while the Netherlands is an example of legal monism. 
Tako Ujedinjeno Kraljevstvo prihvaća izraziti dualistički pristup, dok je Nizozemska primjer pravnog monizma.
Nevertheless, this diversity of approach does not have any effect on the final outcome, i.e., on allowing the legal rules of European law direct effect. 
Međutim, takva različitost pristupa ne utječe na konačni rezultat, tj. na priznavanje izravnog učinka pravnim pravilima europskoga prava.
As for the applicant states, the lack of constitutional standards to regulate the effects of European law shows that most applicant or associate states do not differentiate between association agreements and the rest of international law. 
Kad je riječ o državama kandidatkinjama, nedostatak ustavnih normi koje bi regulirale učinke europskoga prava pokazuje da većina država kandidatkinja i/ili pridruženih država ne razlikuje sporazume o pridruživanju od ostalih ugovora međunarodnoga prava.
In a word, from the point of view of constitutional law, and in the absence of any specific constitutional provisions specifically to govern association agreements, the interpretive paradigms that are applicable to these associations are the same as those that are applied to other international law agreements, and their direct application is not automatic, that is, they do not have a self-executing character, irrespective of the understanding of the European Court, which the courts of the associated countries are not obliged to consider. 
Riječju, s ustavnopravnoga gledišta, a u nedostatku specifičnih ustavnih odredbi koje specifično uređuju sporazume o pridruživanju, interpretativna paradigma primjenjiva na te sporazume jednaka je onoj koja se primjenjuje na druge ugovore međunarodnoga prava, a njihova izravna primjena (odnosno self-executing karakter) nije automatska, bez obzira na shvaćanje Europskoga suda što ga sudovi pridruženih država nisu obvezni uzimati u obzir.
Although there is some technical justification in this approach, it can lead to difficulties in the application of association agreements and the process of the harmonisation of national with European law. 
Iako je takav pristup tehnički opravdan, može stvoriti probleme u primjeni sporazuma o pridruživanju i procesu prilagodbe nacionalnog prava europskome.
We will mention the instance of only one associated country that does not admit self-executing status to the association agreement, and yet in joining the EU will take on the obligation to ascribe this status to all other agreements that the EU has previously entered into with third states. 
Spomenimo tek primjer jedne pridružene države koja ugovoru o pridruživanju ne priznaje self-executing status, a pri pristupanju EU preuzme obvezu da takav status prizna drugim sporazumima o pridruživanju koje je EU prethodno zaključila s trećim državama.
Even if this does not technically create a problem, the very change of the interpretive paradigm will require a certain adjustment. 
Cak ako to tehnički i ne čini problem, sama promjena interpretativne paradigme iziskuje znatne prilagodbe.
Although the absence of express provisions about the position of an association agreement in the national constitutions does not prevent national courts from implementing them, the fact that they do not exist must certainly discourage the courts from applying them. 
Premda nepostojanje izričitih odredbi o položaju sporazuma o pridruživanju u nacionalnim ustavima ne sprečava nacionalne sudove da ih primjenjuju, njihovo nepostojanje može obeshrabriti sudove da ih primijene.
For this reason, as long as both sides fulfil their obligations, the fact that one party ascribes direct application to the provisions of the treaty, and the second does not, will not affect the reciprocity of the treaty. 
Stoga, tako dugo dok obje stranke ispunjavaju svoje obveze, činjenica da jedna stranka priznaje odredbama ugovora izravni učinak, a druga stranka ne priznaje, ne utječe na reciprocitet ugovora”.
This wording shows that the associated countries have not only assumed the obligation adopting the rules of the European Community about market competition, but have also committed themselves to interpreting these rules according to the way the community itself interprets them. 
Navedena dikcija pokazuje da su pridružene države preuzele obvezu primjene ne samo pravila Europske zajednice o tržišnoj utakmici, već i “interpretativne instrumente prihvaćene od institucija Zajednice”.
In this way elements of the acquis are being brought into the legal relationship that in the associated countries is understood as a relationship of international law. 
Na taj se način elementi acquisa communautaire uvode u pravni odnos koji se u pridruženim državama shvaća kao odnos međunarodnog prava.
When the Constitutional Court of Hungary had to face these problems, it concluded that the “principle offavor conventionis will be applied to the limits up to which such a kind of interpretation of national law in line with international would be understood as a breach of the Hungarian Constitution” (Volkai, 1999). 
Kada se s tim problemom suočio Ustavni sud Madžarske, zaključio je kako se “...načelo favor conventionis primjenjuje do granice kada bi zbog takve interpretacije nacionalnog prava u skladu s međunarodnim ugovorom bio povrijeđen madžarski Ustav” (Volkai: 1999).
Thus the Hungarian Constitutional Court has adopted a way of thinking similar to that from the previous constitutional practice of the constitutional courts of some of the member countries, especially of Italy, in the Frontini case, or Germany in the Maastricht cause. 
Na taj je način madžarski Ustavni sud primijenio sličan način razmišljanja koji je poznat iz prethodne ustavne prakse ustavnih sudova nekih država članica, posebice Italije u predmetu Frontini, ili Njemačke u predmetu Maastricht.
The decision of the Hungarian Constitutional Court is explained in greater detail than any other similar decision in the associated countries, i.e., a decision addressing the relationship of national law and the legal system of the EU. 
Odluka madžarskog Ustavnog suda najdetaljnije je obrazložena odluka donesena u nekoj od pridruženih država koja rješava odnos nacionalnog prava i pravnog poretka EU.
However, however much the logic of this decision might seem correct, it has not settled the main problem. 
Međutim, koliko se god logika spomenute odluke činila ispravnom, njome nije riješen glavni pravni problem.
The Europe Agreements provide for the application of the laws of the EU in market competition so that these rules should promote economic rationalisation and facilitate the integration of the associated countries into the EU. 
Sporazumi o pridruživanju predviđaju primjenu pravila Europske zajednice o tržišnoj utakmici kako bi se tim pravilima promicala gospodarska racionalnost te olakšala integracija pridruženih država s EU.
The non-application of these legal rules in the associate membership period would undermine the very goals of the association agreement. 
Neprimjena tih pravnih pravila u razdoblju pridruženog članstva potkopava same ciljeve sporazuma o pridruživanju.
Finally, association agreements differ from the other treaties in international law in that their objective is the accession of a state party to the EU. 
Konačno, sporazumi o pridruživanju razlikuju se od ostalih ugovora međunarodnog prava upravo time što je njihov cilj pristupanje države stranke EU.
For this reason, the courts, I would hold, would have to take this objective into account in the interpretation of the agreements. 
Stoga bi i sudovi, tvrdim, morali taj cilj uzimati u obzir pri interpretaciji ugovora.
An opinion of the Polish Constitutional Courtiv would tend to confirm this; it expressed its readiness to interpret national law in the light of the laws of the Community, and this is justified by the need to respect obligations assumed pursuant to the Europe Agreement. 
U prilog tom prijedlogu govori i mišljenje poljskog Ustavnog suda iv koji je izrazio spremnost da nacionalno pravo interpretira u svjetlu prava Europske zajednice, što je opravdano potrebom za poštovanjem obveza preuzetih temeljem sporazumom o pridruživanju.
“Naturally, EU law does not have any binding power in Poland. 
“Naravno, pravo EU nema obvezujuču snagu u Poljskoj.
Poland thus has the obligation to undertake... everything it can in order to ensure that future laws shall be harmonised with the regulations of the Community.” 
Poljska stoga ima obvezu da poduzme ‘... sve što može kako bi osigurala da buduči zakoni budu usklađeni s propisima Zajednice'.”
And further: 
I dalje:
The Constitutional Court considers that the obligation to ensure the harmonisation of the legislation (which pertains primarily to the government and to the Parliament) also creates the obligation that the existing laws should be interpreted in such a way as to ensure the highest possible degree of such harmonisation.” 
Ustavni sud smatra kako obveza da se osigura usklađenost zakonodavstva (što je ponajprije imaju Parlament i Vlada), također stvara obvezu da se postoječi zakoni interpretiraju na takav način da se osigura najviši moguči stupanj takve usklađenosti.”
Some German authors, Bleckmann for instance, consider that the Europe agreements have not created any kind of supranational legal system and that they remain within the domain of classic international law. 
Neki njemački autori, primjerice Bleckmann, smatraju da sporazumi o pridruživanju ne stvaraju nikakav nadnacionalni pravni poredak te da ostaju u domeni klasičnoga međunarodnog prava.
This understanding is backing up by the claim that the European Community is a creation of international law, and that, in line with this, its states members remain “masters of the treaty”. 
To je shvaćanje popraćeno tvrdnjom da je Europska zajednica tvorevina međunarodnoga prava, te da, u skladu s tim, njezine države članice ostaju “gospodari ugovora”.
According to this author, the institutes founded pursuant to an association agreement, i.e., the decisions of the Council for Stabilisation and Association, do not of themselves have any legal application in the legal system of the EU or in the legal systems of the states members, but should rather be incorporated into the secondary legislation (Bleckman, 1997; 503). 
Prema spomenutom autoru, institucije osnovane na temelju sporazuma o pridruživanju, tj. odluke Vijeća za stabilizaciju i pridruživanje, nemaju same po sebi pravnu primjenu u pravnom poretku Europske zajednice niti u pravnim poredcima država članica, već ih je potrebno inkorporirati sekundarnim zakonodavstvom (Bleckmann: 1997,; 503).
This opinion has been subject to increasingly severe criticism. 
Navedeno je shvaćanje izloženo sve oštrijoj kritici.
Thus Pernice says: 
Tako Pernice ističe:
“An estimate of the many proposals discussed and consideration of concrete steps for the explanation and, if necessary, supplementation of the European system of competences in a changed constitutional treaty should be based on a common understanding of the actual nature of the Union. 
“Ocjena brojnih prijedloga o kojima se raspravlja te razmatranje konkretnih koraka kako bi se razjasnio te, ako je potrebno, upotpunio europski sustav ovlasti u izmijenjenom Ustavnom ugovoru trebali bi se temeljiti na zajedničkom shvaćanju same prirode Unije.
My view is that it is not an international organisation the masters of which are the states members the instruments of which comprehend their citizens because the instruments of the member states recognise their validity. 
Moje je gledište da ona nije međunarodna organizacija čiji su ‘gospodari' države članice i čiji akti dosežu njihove građane zbog toga što im valjanost priznaju akti država članica.
I propose that this be conceived as a multi-level constitutional system that consists, depending on the case, of local, regional, national and European levels of political integration and action and for this reason as a system of multi-level competences that are established so as to be able to satisfy the needs of the citizens at an appropriate level as effectively as possible.” 
Predlažem da se to konceptualizira kao višeslojni ustavni sustav koji se sastoji od, ovisno o slučaju, lokalnih, regionalnih, nacionalnih i europskih razina političke integracije i djelovanja te stoga kao sustav višeslojnih ovlasti koje se uspostavljaju kako bi na prikladnoj razini što učinkovitije zadovoljile potrebe građana.”
This point of view, which is not alone in the constitutional practice of the associated states, is in contravention of the settled practice of the European Court as developed in the interpretation of earlier association agreements. 
Takvo gledište, koje nije usamljeno u ustavnoj praksi pridruženih država, suprotno je ustaljenoj praksi Europskoga suda razvijenoj u interpretaciji ranijih sporazuma o pridruživanju.
Apart from that, I would say that such practice does not contribute to efforts for the adjustment of national law to the legal system of the European Union. 
Osim toga, tvrdim, takva praksa ne pridonosi naporima za prilagodbu nacionalnog prava pravnom poretku Europske zajednice.
It is, that is, possible, as alternative to the classical approach of international law to find different solutions, and some of these possible solutions are indeed in accordance with the common practice in the interpretation of treaties. 
Naime, kao alternativu “klasičnome” pristupu međunarodnoga prava moguće je pronaći drugačija rješenja, a neka od takvih mogućih sukladna su uobičajenoj praksi interpretacije međunarodnih ugovora.
An obvious example can be found in the favor conventionis interpretive principle, that is, in the interpretation of national law in accordance with the treaty. 
Očiti primjer nalazimo u interpretacijskom načelu favor conventionis, tj. interpretaciji nacionalnog prava u skladu s međunarodnim ugovorom.
This concept is well known, and by way of example Germany or England and Wales can be cited (McCarthy v Smith; Hood Phillips: 1980, 31). 
Navedeni je koncept dobro poznat, a kao primjer je moguće navesti SR Njemačku ili pak Englesku i Wales (McCarthys v. Smith; Hood, 1980; 31).
In Germany this concept is known as Volkerrechtfreundliche Auslegung and its application is not limited to the law of the EU. 
U Njemačkoj je koncept poznat kao Volkerrechtjreundliche Auslegung i njegova primjena nije ograničena samo na pravo Europske zajednice.
As explained by the Federal Constitutional Court in the interpretation of the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Liberties “all laws, present and future, must be interpreted in the light of the Convention” (BVerfGE 74, 358/370/; Frowein: 1987). 
Kako je pojasnio Savezni ustavni sud pri interpretaciji Europske konvencije za zaštitu ljudskih prava i temeljnih sloboda, “...svi zakoni, postojeći i budući, moraju se interpretirati u svjetlu Konvencije” (BVerfGE 74, 358 /370/; Frowein, 1987).
According to this approach, the national courts of the associated countries can interpret the provisions of national law in accordance with the association agreement, taking into consideration the current state of affairs of the acquis, including the practice of the European Court. 
Prema navedenom pristupu nacionalni sudovi pridruženih država mogu interpretirati odredbe nacionalnog prava u skladu s odredbama sporazuma o pridruživanju, uzimajući u obzir trenutačno stanje acquisa communautairea, uključujući i praksu Europskoga suda.
Such practice could well lead to gradual acceptance of the direct effect of directly applied provisions of primary and perhaps of secondary law too that derive from the association agreement. 
Takva bi praksa mogla dovesti do postupnog prihvaćanja direktnog učinka izravno primjenjivih odredaba primarnoga, a možda i sekundarnog prava koje proizlazi iz sporazuma o pridruživanju.
An argument in favour of this approach is that the associated countries, assuming their treaty obligations, did intend to conform their national legal systems to the legal system of European law. 
Argument u prilog takvom pristupu jest to da su pridružene države, preuzimajući ugovorne obveze, namjeravale uskladiti svoje nacionalne pravne poretke s pravnim poretkom europskoga prava.
The consequence of such an intention is the obligation to interpret national law and the association agreement in line with the acquis communautaire. 
Posljedica takve namjere jest i obveza da se nacionalno pravo i sporazum o pridruživanju trebaju interpretirati u skladu s acquisom communautaireom.