natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The role of the SEDM-CC to coordinate and manage SEDM activities referred to in this Agreement does not include MPFSEE-related activities and does not constitute any change to or revision of the existing agreed functions, duties and responsibilities of the PMSC in relation to the MPFSEE Agreement, which continue to he in force without prejudice.
Vloga SEDM-CC glede usklajevanja in vodenja dejavnosti SEDM iz tega sporazuma ne vključuje dejavnosti, povezanih z MPFSEE, in ne uvaja nobene spremembe ali revizije obstoječih dogovorjenih nalog, dolžnosti in odgovornosti PMSC v zvezi s sporazumom MPFSEE, ki ostaja v veljavi.
The SEDM-CC will hold either regular meetings before or after the meetings of the PMSC, twice a year, or special meetings held in response to a specific request by any Party or upon invitation by the Chairperson.
SEDM-CC se redno sestaja dvakrat letno pred sestanki PMSC ali po njih ali na izrednih zasedanjih, sklicanih na posebno zahtevo katere od pogodbenic ali na povabilo predsedujočega.
Regular meetings and meetings upon invitation by the Chairperson will be hosted by the Party holding the Chairmanship.
Redne sestanke in sestanke, sklicane na povabilo predsedujočega, gosti predsedujoča pogodbenica.
Special meetings will be hosted by the requesting Party.
Izredna zasedanja gosti pogodbenica, ki jih zahteva.
The hosting Party of the SEDM-CC meeting covers all costs related to the meeting facilities, administrative expenses, internal transportation, accommodation and meals.
Pogodbenica gostiteljica sestanka SEDM-CC krije vse stroške, ki so povezani s prostori in opremo za sestanke, administracijo, notranjimi prevozi, namestitvijo in prehrano.
Participation in the SEDM process is based on the principle of volunteering and consensus of all SEDM member states.
Sodelovanje pri pobudi SEDM temelji na načelu prostovoljnosti in soglasja vseh držav članic SEDM.
Principles, criteria and procedures for participation in the SEDM process will be regulated by a framework document approved by SEDM Ministers.
Načela, merila in postopke za sodelovanje pri pobudi SEDM ureja okvirni dokument, ki ga potrdijo ministri SEDM.
Any State requesting full membership in the SEDM process shall be required to accede to this Agreement by signing a Note of Accession.
Vsaka država, ki zaproša za polno članstvo v pobudi SEDM, mora za pristop k temu sporazumu podpisati pristopno noto.
This Note of Accession will be signed by all Parties.
To pristopno noto podpišejo vse pogodbenice.
Disputes arising from the interpretation or application of this Agreement will be settled by consultations among the Parties without recourse to outside jurisdiction.
Vse spore, ki nastanejo zaradi razlage ali uporabe tega sporazuma, rešujejo pogodbenice z medsebojnimi posvetovanji brez predložitve zadeve sodnim oblastem.
Any Party may propose amendments to this Agreement in writing at any time.
Vsaka pogodbenica lahko kadar koli v pisni obliki predlaga spremembe tega sporazuma.
Any such amendments will be effective when accepted in writing by all Parties in accordance with respective national legal procedures.
Vsaka taka sprememba začne veljati, ko jo pisno odobrijo vse pogodbenice v skladu s svojimi notranje pravnimi postopki.
This Agreement shall be subject to approval in accordance with respective national legal procedures.
Ta sporazum se odobri v skladu s posameznimi notranje pravnimi postopki pogodbenic.
Upon completion of national legal procedures, each Party shall notify the depositary State.
Po končanih notranje pravnih postopkih vsaka od pogodbenic o tem uradno obvesti državo depozitarko.
After all Parties have notified the depositary State that they have completed national legal procedures, this Agreement will enter into effect.
Sporazum začne veljati, ko vse pogodbenice uradno obvestijo državo depozitarko, da so končale notranje pravne postopke.
&apos;The depositary shall duly inform all Parties.
Depozitar o tem seznani vse pogodbenice.
The Parties agree, in so far as national legal procedures permit, to begin implementation of the provisions contained in this Agreement upon signature.
Pogodbenice soglašajo, da? kolikor to dopuščajo notranje pravni postopki? začnejo izvajati določbe tega sporazuma po podpisu.
Upon entry into effect of this Agreement, the Agreement on the Establishment of a Coordination Committee in the Framework of the SEDM Process, signed in Thessaloniki on 9th October 2000 will be superseded and terminated.
Z uveljavitvijo tega sporazuma se nadomesti in preneha veljati Sporazum o ustanovitvi Koordinacijskega odbora v okviru pobude SEDM, ki je bil podpisan 9. oktobra 2000 v Solunu.
This Agreement shall remain in effect for an indefinite period of time, unless the Parties decide otherwise.
Ta sporazum velja za nedoločen čas, razen če se pogodbenice ne dogovorijo drugače.
This Agreement may be denounced by any Party at any time.
Vsaka pogodbenica lahko ta sporazum kadar koli odpove.
The denunciation will be effected by a written notification addressed by this Party to the depositary.
Odpoved izvede s pisnim uradnim obvestilom, ki ga naslovi na depozitarja.
In such a case the depositary shall duly inform all Parties.
V takem primeru depozitar o tem seznani vse pogodbenice.
The denunciation shad take effect thirty days after the date of receipt of such notification.
Odstop začne veljati trideset dni po prejemu takega uradnega obvestila.
After the expiration of this period, the Agreement shall cease to be in effect as regards the Party that denounced it, but it shall continue to be in effect for the remaining Parties.
Po tem obdobju sporazum preneha veljati za pogodbenico, ki ga je odpovedala, ostane pa v veljavi za vse druge pogodbenice.
If, on the effective denunciation date, there are still unresolved financial issues or claims that affect the denouncing Party, this Agreement shall continue to apply with respect to the resolution of these issues or claims.
Če na dan uveljavitve odpovedi še vedno obstajajo nerešene finančne zadeve ali zahtevki do pogodbenice v odstopu, se za razrešitev teh zadev ali zahtevkov ta sporazum uporablja še naprej.
Done in Sofia on the 21st of October metricconverterProductID2009 in2009 in one original, in the English language, which will be deposited with the government of Greece.
Sestavljeno v Sofiji dne 21. oktobra 2009 v enem izvirniku v angleškem jeziku, ki se deponira pri vladi Grčije.
The latter will provide certified copies to all Parties.
Ta pošlje overjene kopije vsem pogodbenicam.
On behalf of the Parties
Za pogodbenice
EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON THE INTERNATIONAL VALIDITY OF CRIMINAL JUDGMENTS
EVROPSKA KONVENCIJA O MEDNARODNI VELJAVNOSTI KAZENSKIH SODB
Part II Enforcement of European criminal judgments
II. del Izvršitev evropskih kazenskih sodb
a sanctions involving deprivation of liberty;
a) za sankcije odvzema prostosti
b fines or confiscation;
b) za denarne kazni ali zaplembe
c disqualifications.
c) za izgubo pravic.
a if the person sentenced is ordinarily resident in the other State;
a) če ima obsojenec stalno prebivališče v drugi državi;
b if the enforcement of the sanction in the other State is likely to improve the prospects for the social rehabilitation of the person sentenced;
b) če izvršitev sankcije v drugi državi utegne izboljšati možnosti resocializacije obsojenca;
c if, in the case of a sanction involving deprivation of liberty, the sanction could be enforced following the enforcement of another sanction involving deprivation of liberty which the person sentenced is undergoing or is to undergo in the other State;
c) če bi v primeru sankcije odvzema prostosti to sankcijo izvršili šele po izvršitvi druge sankcije odvzema prostosti, ki jo obsojenec prestaja ali jo mora prestati v drugi državi;
Section 2? Requests for enforcement
poglavje? Zaprosila za izvršitev
Section 3? Judgments rendered in absentia and ordonnances pénales
poglavje? Sodbe v nenavzočnosti in kazenski sklepi
National legislations shall be applicable in the matter of reinstatement if the sentenced person, for reasons beyond his control, failed to observe the time-limits laid down in Articles 24, 25 and 26 or to appear personally at the hearing fixed for the new examination of the case.
Domača zakonodaja se uporablja za vrnitev v prejšnje stanje, če obsojenec iz razlogov, na katere ni mogel vplivati, ni spoštoval rokov, določenih v 24., metricconverterProductID25. in25. in 26. členu te konvencije ali ni osebno prišel na obravnavo, določeno za ponovno proučitev zadeve.
Section 4? Provisional measures
poglavje? Začasni ukrepi
The said application shall state the offence which led to the judgment and the time and place of its perpetration, and contain as accurate a description as possible of the person sentenced.
V tej prošnji je treba navesti kaznivo dejanje, zaradi katerega je prišlo do sodbe, ter čas in kraj storitve tega dejanja, kakor tudi čim natančnejši osebni opis obsojenca.
It shall also contain a brief statement of the facts on which the judgment is based.
Vsebovati mora tudi kratko navedbo dejstev, na katerih temelji obsodba.
Section 5? Enforcement of sanctions
poglavje? Izvršitev sankcij
Part III International effects of European criminal judgments
III. del Mednarodni učinki evropskih kazenskih sodb
Section 2? Taking into consideration
poglavje? Upoštevanje učinkov evropskih kazenskih sodb
a any signature;
a) vsakem podpisu;
The case originated in an application (no. 26828/06) against the Republic of Slovenia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (&quot;the Convention&quot;) by Mr, a Croatian national, and by ten other applicants, on 4 July 2006.
Zadeva se je začela s pritožbo (št. 26828/06) proti Republiki Sloveniji, ki so jo po 34. členu Konvencije o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin (v nadaljnjem besedilu: konvencija) pri Sodišču 4. julija 2006 vložili, hrvaški državljan, in deset drugih pritožnikov.
After the death of Mr, the case was renamed Kuriæ and Others v. Slovenia. Eight applicants remain before the Grand Chamber (see paragraph 15 below).
Po smrti se je zadeva preimenovala v Kurić in drugi proti Sloveniji. Pred velikim senatom ostaja osem pritožnikov (glej 15. odstavek).
Under Article 8 of the Convention, the applicants alleged, in particular, that they had been arbitrarily deprived of their status as permanent residents after Slovenia had declared its independence in 1991. They also complained under Article 13 of the Convention that no effective legal remedies were available in that respect, and under Article 14, read in conjunction with Article 8 of the Convention, that they had been subjected to discriminatory treatment.
Pritožniki so na podlagi 8. a konvencije trdili, da jim je bil samovoljno odvzet status stalnega prebivalca, potem ko je Slovenija razglasila svojo neodvisnost leta 1991. Pritožili so se tudi na podlagi 13. člena konvencije, da niso imeli na voljo nobenega pravnega sredstva s tem v zvezi, in na podlagi 14. člena v povezavi z 8. členom konvencije, da so bili obravnavani diskriminacijsko.
Lastly, they submitted that, in breach of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, they had been arbitrarily denied their pension rights.
Na koncu so trdili, da so jim bile samovoljno odvzete pokojninske pravice v nasprotju s 1. členom protokola št. 1.
The application was allocated to the Court&apos;s Third Section (Rule 52 § 1 of the Rules of Court), which decided on 10 November 2006 to notify the respondent Government of it as a matter of urgency under Rule 40 of the Rules of Court and to grant priority to it under Rule 41.
Pritožba je bila dodeljena tretjemu oddelku Sodišča (prvi odstavek 52. člena Poslovnika Sodišča), ki je 10. novembra 2006 sklenil, da o njej kot nujni zadevi obvesti toženo vlado po 40. členu Poslovnika Sodišča in da zanjo odobri prednostno obravnavo po 41. členu poslovnika.
On 31 May 2007 the Third Section, composed of the following judges and also of Section Registrar, decided to give notice to the respondent Government of the complaints under Article 8, taken alone and in conjunction with Articles 13 and 14 of the Convention and under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article 29 § 1).
31. maja 2007 je tretji oddelek, ki so ga sestavljali sodniki ter sodni tajnik oddelka, sklenil, da obvesti toženo vlado o pritožbah na podlagi 8. a samega in v povezavi s 13. in 14. členom konvencije ter na podlagi 1. člena protokola št. 1. Prav tako je bila sprejeta odločitev, da se bo hkrati odločalo o sprejemljivosti in utemeljenosti pritožbe (prvi odstavek 29. člena).
The remainder of the application was declared inadmissible.
Preostali del pritožbe je bil razglašen za nesprejemljivega.
Furthermore, third-party comments were received from the Serbian Government, who had exercised their right to intervene (Article 36 § 1 of the Convention and Rule 44 § 1 (b)).
Prejete so bile tudi pripombe tretje strani, srbske vlade, ki je uveljavljala pravico do posredovanja (prvi odstavek 36. člena konvencije in točka b prvega odstavka 44. člena poslovnika).
Third-party observations were also submitted by the Equal Rights Trust, Open Society Justice Initiative, the Peace Institute - Institute for Contemporary Social and Political Studies, and the Legal Information Centre of Non-Governmental Organisations, which had been given leave by the President to intervene in the written procedure (Article 36 § 2 of the Convention and Rule 44 § 3).
Pripombe tretje strani so predložili tudi Equal Rights Trust, Open Society Justice Initiative, Mirovni inštitut - Inštitut za sodobne družbene in politične študije ter Pravno-informacijski center nevladnih organizacij, ki jim je predsednik senata dovolil, da posredujejo v pisnem postopku (drugi odstavek 36. člena konvencije in tretji odstavek 44. člena poslovnika).
The respondent Government and the applicants replied to the Serbian Government&apos;s comments.
Tožena vlada in pritožniki so odgovorili na pripombe srbske vlade.
Further to the notification under Article 36 § 1 of the Convention and Rule 44 § 1 (a), the Croatian Government and the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina did not wish to exercise their right to intervene in the present case.
V zvezi z uradnim obvestilom po prvem odstavku 36. člena konvencije in točke a prvega odstavka 44. člena poslovnika vladi Hrvaške ter Bosne in Hercegovine nista želeli uveljavljati pravice do posredovanja v tej zadevi.
On 13 July 2010 a Chamber of the Third Section, composed of the following judges and also of Section Registrar, declared the application admissible in respect of the complaints of eight of the applicants under Articles 8, 13 and 14 of the Convention, and held unanimously that there had been a violation of Articles 8 and 13 of the Convention and that it was not necessary to examine the complaint under Article 14 of the Convention.
13. julija 2010 je senat tretjega oddelka, ki so ga sestavljali sodniki: ter sodni tajnik oddelka, razglasil pritožbo za sprejemljivo glede pritožb osmih pritožnikov na podlagi 8., 13. in 14. člena konvencije ter soglasno razsodil, da sta bila kršena 8. in 13. člen konvencije in da proučitev pritožbe na podlagi 14. člena konvencije ni potrebna.
The Chamber also held that a relative of the late applicant did not have standing to continue the proceedings in his stead.
Senat je tudi razsodil, da sorodnik pokojnega pritožnika nima pravnega razloga, da bi nadaljeval postopek namesto njega.
The complaints of Mr and Mr, who had been granted permanent residence permits, and the remainder of the other applicants&apos; complaints were declared inadmissible.
Pritožbi, ki sta pridobila dovoljenje za stalno prebivanje, ter preostali del pritožb drugih pritožnikov so bili razglašeni za nesprejemljive.
In addition, the Chamber indicated to the respondent Government the appropriate general and individual measures to be adopted under Article 46 and reserved the question of just satisfaction under Article 41 of the Convention.
Poleg tega je senat toženi vladi navedel primerne splošne in posamezne ukrepe, ki jih mora sprejeti po 46. členu, ter pridržal odločanje o pravičnem zadoščenju po 41. členu konvencije.
On 13 October 2010 the Government asked for the case to be referred to the Grand Chamber by virtue of Article 43 of the Convention and Rule 73. On 21 February 2011 a panel of the Grand Chamber granted that request.
Vlada je 13. oktobra 2010 zahtevala, da se zadeva predloži velikemu senatu na podlagi 43. člena konvencije in 73. člena poslovnika. Zbor velikega senata je 21. februarja 2011 ugodil tej zahtevi.
The composition of the Grand Chamber was determined according to the provisions of Article 26 §§ 4 and 5 of the Convention and Rule 24. On 3 November 2011 term as President of the Court came to an end. succeeded him in that capacity and took over the presidency of the Grand Chamber in the present case (Rule 9 § 2). continued to sit following the expiry of his term of office, in accordance with Article 23 § 3 of the Convention and Rule 24 § 4.
Sestava velikega senata je bila določena v skladu z določbami četrtega in petega odstavka 26. člena konvencije ter 24. člena poslovnika. 3. novembra 2011 se je končalo mandatno obdobje predsednika Sodišča. Na tem mestu ga je nasledil in prevzel predsedovanje velikemu senatu v obravnavani zadevi (drugi odstavek 9. člena poslovnika). je po poteku svojega mandata še naprej sodeloval pri obravnavanju zadeve v skladu s tretjim odstavkom 23. člena konvencije in četrtim odstavkom 24. člena poslovnika.
The applicants and the respondent Government each filed written observations.
Pritožniki in tožena vlada so predložili svoja pisna stališča.
In addition, third-party comments were received from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (&quot;UNHCR&quot;), which had been given leave by the President to intervene in the written procedure before the Grand Chamber (Article 36 § 2 of the Convention and Rule 44 § 3).
Prejete so bile tudi pripombe tretje strani, Urada visokega komisarja ZN za begunce (UNHCR), ki mu je predsednik dovolil, da posreduje v pisnem postopku pred velikim senatom (drugi odstavek 36. a konvencije in tretji odstavek 44. člena poslovnika).
Open Society Justice Initiative also filed updated and consolidated submissions.
Open Society Justice Initiative je tudi predložil dopolnjeno in prečiščeno vlogo.
The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (&quot;the SFRY&quot;) was a federal State composed of six republics: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia, Montenegro and Macedonia.
Socialistična federativna republika Jugoslavija (v nadaljnjem besedilu: SFRJ) je bila zvezna država, sestavljena iz šestih republik: Bosna in Hercegovina, Hrvaška, Srbija, Slovenija, Črna gora in Makedonija.
SFRY nationals had &quot;dual citizenship&quot; for internal purposes, that is, they were citizens both of the SFRY and of one of the six republics.
Državljani SFRJ so imeli za notranje namene &quot;dvojno državljanstvo&quot;, kar pomeni, da so bili državljani SFRJ in tudi ene od šestih republik.
Until 1974, federal citizenship prevailed over republic citizenship:
Do leta 1974 je zvezno državljanstvo prevladovalo nad republiškim:
republic citizenship could only be held by a Yugoslav citizen.
republiško državljanstvo je lahko imel le državljan Jugoslavije.
The regulation of citizenship was similar in all republics of the SFRY, with the basic principle of acquiring citizenship by blood (jus sanguinis).
Ureditev državljanstva je bila podobna v vseh republikah SFRJ, pri čemer je veljalo temeljno načelo pridobitve državljanstva po zakonskem očetu oziroma nezakonski materi (ius sanguinis).
In principle, a child acquired his or her parents&apos; citizenship; if the parents were citizens of different republics, they jointly agreed on their child&apos;s citizenship.
Načeloma je otrok pridobil državljanstvo po svojih starših; če so bili starši državljani različnih republik, so se dogovorili o državljanstvu otroka.
On the date of acquisition of the citizenship of another republic, a person&apos;s prior republic citizenship came to an end.
Z datumom pridobitve državljanstva druge republike je prejšnje republiško državljanstvo osebe prenehalo.
From 1947 a separate Register of Citizenship was kept at the level of the republics and not at the level of the federal State.
Od leta 1947 so se državljanske knjige vodile na ravni republik in ne na ravni zvezne države.
From 1974 the citizenship data for newly born children were entered in the Register of Births and from 1984 the entry of data in the Register of Citizenship ended, all citizenship data being entered in the Register of Births.
Od leta 1974 so se državljanski podatki za novorojene otroke vnašali v rojstno matično knjigo in od leta 1984 so se prenehali vnašati v državljansko knjigo, ker so bili vsi podatki o državljanstvu vneseni v rojstno matično knjigo.
SFRY citizens had freedom of movement within the federal State and could register permanent residence wherever they settled on its territory.
Državljani SFRJ so se svobodno gibali v zvezni državi in so lahko prijavili stalno prebivališče, kjer so se naselili, kjer koli na njenem ozemlju.
Full enjoyment of various civil, economic, social and even political rights for SFRY citizens was linked to permanent residence.
Polno uživanje različnih civilnih, ekonomskih, socialnih in celo političnih pravic državljanov SFRJ je bilo vezano na stalno prebivališče.
SFRY citizens living in the then Socialist Republic of Slovenia who were citizens of one of the other SFRY republics, such as the applicants, registered their permanent residence there in the same way as Slovenian citizens.
Državljani SFRJ, ki so živeli v tedanji Socialistični republiki Sloveniji in so bili državljani ene od drugih republik SFRJ tako kot pritožniki, so stalno prebivališče v Sloveniji prijavili enako kot slovenski državljani.
Foreign citizens could also acquire permanent residence in the SFRY under a separate procedure.
Tuji državljani so lahko pridobili tudi stalno prebivališče v SFRJ po drugem postopku.
21. In the process of the dissolution of the SFRY, Slovenia took steps towards independence.
Med razpadom Jugoslavije je Slovenija sprejela ukrepe za osamosvojitev.
On 6 December 1990, the then Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia adopted the &quot;Statement of Good Intentions&quot; (Izjava o dobrih namenih), guaranteeing that all persons with permanent residence on Slovenian territory would be enabled to acquire Slovenian citizenship if they so wished (see paragraph 200 below).
6. decembra 1990 je takratna Skupščina Republike Slovenije sprejela Izjavo o dobrih namenih, ki je zagotavljala vsem osebam s stalnim prebivališčem na slovenskem ozemlju, da bodo lahko pridobili slovensko državljanstvo, če bodo to želeli (glej 200. odstavek).
On 25 June 1991 Slovenia declared its independence.
25. junija 1991 je Slovenija razglasila svojo neodvisnost.
A series of laws termed &quot;the independence legislation&quot; were passed.
Sprejeta je bila vrsta zakonov, imenovana &quot;osamosvojitvena zakonodaja&quot;.
This included the Citizenship of the Republic of Slovenia Act (Zakon o državljanstvu Republike Slovenije - &quot;the Citizenship Act&quot;), the Aliens Act (Zakon o tujcih, see paragraphs 205-207 below), the National Border Control Act (Zakon o nadzoru državne meje) and the Passports of the Citizens of Slovenia Act (Zakon o potnih listinah državljanov Republike Slovenije).
Vključevala je Zakon o državljanstvu Republike Slovenije, Zakon o tujcih (glej 205.- 207. odstavek), Zakon o nadzoru državne meje in Zakon o potnih listinah državljanov Republike Slovenije.
At the material time, in contrast with some of the other former SFRY republics, the Slovenian population was relatively homogeneous, as roughly 90% of the 2 million residents had Slovenian citizenship.
Takrat je bilo v Sloveniji v nasprotju z nekaterimi drugimi republikami nekdanje SFRJ prebivalstvo precej homogeno, saj je imelo približno 90 % od dveh milijonov prebivalcev slovensko državljanstvo.