natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Unless otherwise required, it should be possible to provide the information communicated to the victim orally or in writing, including through electronic means.
Če ni zahtevano drugače, bi moralo biti omogočeno, da se lahko informacije žrtvi sporočijo ustno ali pisno, vključno z elektronskimi sredstvi.
Information to a victim should be provided to the last known correspondence address or electronic contact details given to the competent authority by the victim.
Žrtvi bi bilo treba informacije posredovati na zadnji znani poštni ali elektronski naslov, ki ga je posredovala pristojnim organom.
In exceptional cases, for example due to the high number of victims involved in a case, it should be possible to provide information through the press, through an official website of the competent authority or through a similar communication channel.
Izjemoma, npr. če je žrtev, prizadetih v posameznem primeru, večje število, bi moralo biti omogočeno, da se informacije zagotavljajo prek medijev, na uradnem spletnem portalu pristojnega organa ali prek podobnega komunikacijskega kanala.
Member States should not be obliged to provide information where disclosure of that information could affect the proper handling of a case or harm a given case or person, or if they consider it contrary to the essential interests of their security.
Države članice ne bi smele biti obvezane zagotavljati informacij, če bi razkritje teh informacij lahko negativno vplivalo na ustrezno obravnavo zadeve ali škodovalo konkretni zadevi ali če menijo, da je to v nasprotju z njihovimi ključnimi varnostnimi interesi.
Competent authorities should ensure that victims receive updated contact details for communication about their case unless the victim has expressed a wish not to receive such information.
Pristojni organi bi morali zagotoviti, da žrtve prejmejo posodobljene kontaktne podatke za prejemanje informacij v zvezi z njihovo zadevo, razen če žrtev izjavi, da ne želi prejemati takšnih informacij.
A reference to a ‘decision’ in the context of the right to information, interpretation and translation, should be understood only as a reference to the finding of guilt or otherwise ending criminal proceedings.
Sklicevanje na „odločitev“ v zvezi s pravico do informacij, tolmačenja in prevajanja bi bilo treba razumeti samo kot sklic na ugotovitev krivde ali na drugačen zaključek postopka.
The reasons for that decision should be provided to the victim through a copy of the document which contains that decision or through a brief summary of them.
Obrazložitev takšne odločitve bi bilo treba dati žrtvi s kopijo dokumenta, v katerega je vključena odločitev, ali s kratkim povzetkom obrazložitev.
The right to information about the time and place of a trial resulting from the complaint with regard to a criminal offence suffered by the victim should also apply to information about the time and place of a hearing related to an appeal of a judgment in the case.
Pravica do obveščenosti o času in kraju obravnave, ki je posledica prijave kaznivega dejanja zoper žrtev, bi se morala uporabljati tudi za informacije o času in kraju zaslišanja v zvezi s pritožbo zoper sodbo v zadevi.
Specific information about the release or the escape of the offender should be given to victims, upon request, at least in cases where there might be a danger or an identified risk of harm to the victims, unless there is an identified risk of harm to the offender which would result from the notification.
Žrtve bi morale prejeti določene informacije o izpustitvi ali pobegu storilca, če zanje zaprosijo, vsaj v primerih, kadar obstaja nevarnost za žrtev ali je ugotovljeno tveganje, da bi žrtvi lahko bila povzročena škoda, razen če je ugotovljeno tveganje, da bi zaradi uradne obvestitve lahko bila povzročena škoda storilcu.
Where there is an identified risk of harm to the offender which would result from the notification, the competent authority should take into account all other risks when determining an appropriate action.
Če je ugotovljeno, da bi bil storilec zaradi takšnega obvestila lahko ogrožen, bi moral pristojni organ pri odločanju o ustreznem ukrepanju upoštevati vsa druga tveganja.
The reference to ‘identified risk of harm to the victims’ should cover such factors as the nature and severity of the crime and the risk of retaliation.
Sklicevanje na „ugotovljeno tveganje, da bo žrtvi povzročena škoda“, bi moralo zajemati dejavnike, kot so narava in resnost kaznivega dejanja in nevarnost maščevanja.
Therefore, it should not be applied to those situations where minor offences were committed and thus where there is only a slight risk of harm to the victim.
Zato naj se ne bi uporabilo za tiste primere, ko so bila storjena lažja kazniva dejanja in je torej tveganje, da je bila žrtvi povzročena škoda, zelo majhno.
Victims should receive information about any right to appeal of a decision to release the offender, if such a right exists in national law.
Žrtve bi morale biti poučene, kako je s pravico do pritožbe zoper odločitev o izpustitvi storilca, če takšna pravica v nacionalnem pravu obstaja.
Justice cannot be effectively achieved unless victims can properly explain the circumstances of the crime and provide their evidence in a manner understandable to the competent authorities.
Pravici ne more biti zares zadoščeno, če žrtve ne morejo ustrezno pojasniti okoliščin kaznivega dejanja ter zagotoviti svojih dokazov na način, ki je razumljiv pristojnim organom.
It is equally important to ensure that victims are treated in a respectful manner and that they are able to access their rights.
Enako pomembno je zagotoviti, da se žrtve spoštljivo obravnava, ter jim omogočiti uveljavljanje njihovih pravic.
Interpretation should therefore be made available, free of charge, during questioning of the victim and in order to enable them to participate actively in court hearings, in accordance with the role of the victim in the relevant criminal justice system.
Brezplačno tolmačenje bi moralo biti na voljo med zaslišanjem žrtve ter da se jim omogoči dejavno sodelovanje na sodni obravnavi, v skladu z vlogo žrtve v ustreznem sistemu kazenskega pravosodja.
For other aspects of criminal proceedings, the need for interpretation and translation can vary depending on specific issues, the role of the victim in the relevant criminal justice system and his or her involvement in proceedings and any specific rights they have.
V zvezi z drugimi vidiki kazenskega postopka je lahko potreba po tolmačenju in prevajanju odvisna od konkretnih vprašanj, vloge žrtve v ustreznem sistemu kazenskega pravosodja in njenega sodelovanja v postopku ter morebitnih posebnih pravic žrtve.
As such, interpretation and translation for these other cases need only be provided to the extent necessary for victims to exercise their rights.
Tolmačenje in prevajanje je treba v navedenih drugih primerih zagotoviti le v obsegu, ki je potreben, da bi žrtve uveljavile svoje pravice.
The victim should have the right to challenge a decision finding that there is no need for interpretation or translation, in accordance with procedures in national law.
Žrtev bi morala imeti v skladu s postopki po nacionalni zakonodaji pravico do izpodbijanja odločitve o tem, da tolmačenje ali prevajanje ni potrebno.
That right does not entail the obligation for Member States to provide for a separate mechanism or complaint procedure in which such decision may be challenged and should not unreasonably prolong the criminal proceedings.
Ta pravica ne pomeni, da morajo države članice zagotoviti ločen mehanizem ali pritožbeni postopek, v okviru katerega bi bilo mogoče izpodbijati takšno odločitev; prav tako se zaradi nje kazenski postopek ne bi smel preveč zavleči.
An internal review of the decision in accordance with existing national procedures would suffice.
Zadostovati bi moral notranji pregled odločitve v skladu z obstoječimi nacionalnimi postopki.
The fact that a victim speaks a language which is not widely spoken should not, in itself, be grounds to decide that interpretation or translation would unreasonably prolong the criminal proceedings.
Dejstvo, da žrtev govori jezik, ki se ne govori pogosto, samo po sebi ne bi smelo biti podlaga za ugotovitev, da bi tolmačenje ali prevajanje preveč podaljšalo kazenski postopek.
Support should be available from the moment the competent authorities are aware of the victim and throughout criminal proceedings and for an appropriate time after such proceedings in accordance with the needs of the victim and the rights set out in this Directive.
Podpora bi morala biti na voljo od trenutka, ko so pristojni organi obveščeni o žrtvi kaznivega dejanja, in med kazenskim postopkom ter ustrezno obdobje po njem v skladu s potrebami žrtve in pravicami iz te direktive.
Support should be provided through a variety of means, without excessive formalities and through a sufficient geographical distribution across the Member State to allow all victims the opportunity to access such services.
Podporo bi bilo treba zagotoviti na različne načine brez prekomernih formalnosti ter z zadostno geografsko porazdelitvijo znotraj države članice, da se vsem žrtvam omogoči dostop do teh storitev.
Victims who have suffered considerable harm due to the severity of the crime could require specialist support services.
Žrtve, ki so utrpele znatno škodo zaradi resnosti kaznivega dejanja, bi lahko potrebovale specialistično podporo.
Persons who are particularly vulnerable or who find themselves in situations that expose them to a particularly high risk of harm, such as persons subjected to repeat violence in close relationships, victims of gender-based violence, or persons who fall victim to other types of crime in a Member State of which they are not nationals or residents, should be provided with specialist support and legal protection.
Najbolj ranljive osebe ali posamezniki, ki so v situacijah, zaradi katerih so izpostavljeni še posebej visokemu tveganju za škodo, npr. osebe, ki so vedno znova žrtve nasilja v odnosih z bližnjimi, osebe, ki so žrtve nasilja na podlagi spola, ali osebe, ki postanejo žrtve drugih kaznivih dejanj v državi članici, ki ni država njihovega državljanstva oziroma prebivališča, bi morali imeti na voljo specialistično podporo in pravno varstvo.
Specialist support services should be based on an integrated and targeted approach which should, in particular, take into account the specific needs of victims, the severity of the harm suffered as a result of a criminal offence, as well as the relationship between victims, offenders, children and their wider social environment.
Specialistična podpora bi morala temeljiti na celostnem in usmerjenem pristopu, pri katerem bi bilo treba upoštevati zlasti posebne potrebe žrtev, težo škode, povzročene s kaznivim dejanjem, ter odnos med žrtvami, storilci, otroki in njihovim širšim socialnim okoljem.
A main task of these services and their staff, which play an important role in supporting the victim to recover from and overcome potential harm or trauma as a result of a criminal offence, should be to inform victims about the rights set out in this Directive so that they can take decisions in a supportive environment that treats them with dignity, respect and sensitivity.
Glavna naloga teh služb in njihovega osebja, ki imajo pomembno vlogo, saj žrtvam nudijo podporo pri okrevanju in premagovanju morebitne škode ali pretresov zaradi kaznivega dejanja, bi morala biti obveščanje žrtev o njihovih pravicah iz te direktive, da bodo žrtve odločitve lahko sprejemale v prijaznem okolju, kjer bodo obravnavane dostojanstveno, spoštljivo in uvidevno.
The types of support that such specialist support services should offer could include providing shelter and safe accommodation, immediate medical support, referral to medical and forensic examination for evidence in cases of rape or sexual assault, short and long-term psychological counselling, trauma care, legal advice, advocacy and specific services for children as direct or indirect victims.
Vrste podpore, ki bi jo takšne specialistične službe za podporo morale zagotavljati, bi lahko vključevala nudenje zavetišča in varne namestitve, takojšnjo zdravstveno pomoč, napotitev k službam za medicinske preglede in sodno-medicinske preiskave zaradi zavarovanja dokazov pri posilstvih ali spolnih napadih, takojšnje in dalj časa trajajoče psihološko svetovanje, pomoč po travmatični izkušnji, pravno svetovanje, odvetniške storitve in posebne storitve za otroke kot neposredne ali posredne žrtve.
Victim support services are not required to provide extensive specialist and professional expertise themselves.
Službe za podporo žrtvam obsežne specialistične in strokovne pomoči navadno ne zagotavljajo same.
If necessary, victim support services should assist victims in calling on existing professional support, such as psychologists.
Te službe bi morale žrtvam po potrebi pomagati, da navežejo stike z obstoječimi službami za strokovno podporo, kot so psihologi.
Although the provision of support should not be dependent on victims making a complaint with regard to a criminal offence to a competent authority such as the police, such authorities are often best placed to inform victims of the possibility of support.
Čeprav zagotavljanje podpore ne bi smelo biti odvisno od tega, ali so žrtve prijavile kaznivo dejanje pri pristojnem organu, kot je policija, so prav ti organi pogosto najprimernejši za obveščanje žrtev o možnosti podpore.
Member States are therefore encouraged to establish appropriate conditions to enable the referral of victims to victim support services, including by ensuring that data protection requirements can be and are adhered to.
Države članice se zato spodbujajo, naj vzpostavijo ustrezne pogoje, ki bi omogočali napotitev žrtev k uporabi storitev za pomoč žrtvam, tudi z zagotavljanjem, da se lahko pri tem upoštevajo zahteve glede varstva podatkov in da se te dejansko upoštevajo.
Repeat referrals should be avoided.
Izogibati bi se bilo treba večkratnim napotitvam.
The right of victims to be heard should be considered to have been fulfilled where victims are permitted to make statements or explanations in writing.
Pravico žrtve do zaslišanja bi morali šteti za izpolnjeno tedaj, ko se žrtvam dovoli, da podajo pisno izjavo ali pojasnila.
The right of child victims to be heard in criminal proceedings should not be precluded solely on the basis that the victim is a child or on the basis of that victim's age.
Otrokom žrtvam pravice do zaslišanja v kazenskem postopku ne bi smeli odreči zgolj z obrazložitvijo, da je žrtev otrok, ali na podlagi starosti žrtve.
The right to a review of a decision not to prosecute should be understood as referring to decisions taken by prosecutors and investigative judges or law enforcement authorities such as police officers, but not to the decisions taken by courts.
Pravica do zahteve za preskus odločitve, da se pregon ne izvede, bi se morala razumeti, kot da se nanaša na odločitve, ki jih sprejmejo tožilci in preiskovalni sodniki ali organi pregona, kot so policisti, ne pa tudi na odločitve, ki jih sprejmejo sodišča.
Any review of a decision not to prosecute should be carried out by a different person or authority to that which made the original decision, unless the initial decision not to prosecute was taken by the highest prosecuting authority, against whose decision no review can be made, in which case the review may be carried out by that same authority.
Vsakršno presojo odločitve, da se pregon ne izvede, bi morala opraviti oseba oziroma organ, ki ni sprejel(-a) prvotne odločitve, razen če je prvotno odločitev, da se pregon ne izvede, sprejel najvišji organ, pristojen za pregon, za čigar odločitev ni mogoče zahtevati preskusa; v tem primeru lahko preskus opravi isti organ.
The right to a review of a decision not to prosecute does not concern special procedures, such as proceedings against members of parliament or government, in relation to the exercise of their official position.
Pravica do preskusa odločitve, da se pregon ne izvede, ne zadeva posebnih postopkov, kot so postopki zoper člane parlamenta ali vlade v zvezi z izvrševanjem njihove funkcije.
A decision ending criminal proceedings should include situations where a prosecutor decides to withdraw charges or discontinue proceedings.
Sklep o zaključku kazenskega postopka bi moral zajemati tudi primere, v katerih se tožilec odloči za umik obtožbe ali prekinitev postopka.
A decision of the prosecutor resulting in an out-of-court settlement and thus ending criminal proceedings, excludes victims from the right to a review of a decision of the prosecutor not to prosecute, only if the settlement imposes a warning or an obligation.
Z odločitvijo tožilca, ki privede do zunajsodne poravnave in s tem do zaključka kazenskega postopka, se žrtve od pravice, da zahtevajo presojo tožilčeve odločitve, da se pregon ne izvede, izključijo samo, če se s poravnavo nalaga opomin ali obveznost.
Restorative justice services, including for example victim-offender mediation, family group conferencing and sentencing circles, can be of great benefit to the victim, but require safeguards to prevent secondary and repeat victimisation, intimidation and retaliation.
Storitve poravnalne pravičnosti, vključno na primer z mediacijo med žrtvijo in storilcem, skupinskimi srečanji za družine ter poravnalnimi naroki, lahko zelo koristijo žrtvi, vendar so potrebni zaščitni ukrepi za preprečitev kakršne koli sekundarne in ponovne viktimizacije, ustrahovanja in maščevanja.
Such services should therefore have as a primary consideration the interests and needs of the victim, repairing the harm done to the victim and avoiding further harm.
Takšne storitve bi morale tako predvsem upoštevati interese in potrebe žrtve, popraviti škodo, povzročeno žrtvi, ter preprečiti nadaljnjo škodo.
Factors such as the nature and severity of the crime, the ensuing degree of trauma, the repeat violation of a victim's physical, sexual, or psychological integrity, power imbalances, and the age, maturity or intellectual capacity of the victim, which could limit or reduce the victim's ability to make an informed choice or could prejudice a positive outcome for the victim, should be taken into consideration in referring a case to the restorative justice services and in conducting a restorative justice process.
Pri predaji zadeve storitvam poravnalne pravičnosti in pri poteku postopka poravnalne pravičnosti bi bilo treba upoštevati dejavnike, kot so narava in teža kaznivega dejanja, stopnja posledično nastalega pretresa, ponavljajoče se kršitve telesne, spolne ali psihološke nedotakljivosti žrtve, neravnotežje moči ter starost, zrelost ali intelektualno zmožnost žrtve, ki bi lahko omejili ali zmanjšali njeno sposobnost sprejemanja premišljene odločitve oziroma bi lahko ogrozili pozitivni rezultat za žrtev.
Restorative justice processes should, in principle, be confidential, unless agreed otherwise by the parties, or as required by national law due to an overriding public interest.
Postopek poravnalne pravičnosti bi moral biti na splošno tajen, razen če se stranke sporazumejo drugače, ali takšen, kakršnega zahteva nacionalno pravo zaradi prevladujočega javnega interesa.
Factors such as threats made or any forms of violence committed during the process may be considered as requiring disclosure in the public interest.
Dejavniki, kot so grožnje ali kakršna koli oblika nasilja, ki se zgodijo med postopkom, je mogoče šteti za tako pomembne, da jih je treba razkriti zaradi javnega interesa.
Victims should not be expected to incur expenses in relation to their participation in criminal proceedings.
Žrtve ne bi smele trpeti stroškov zaradi udeležbe v kazenskem postopku.
Member States should be required to reimburse only necessary expenses of victims in relation to their participation in criminal proceedings and should not be required to reimburse victims' legal fees.
Države članice bi morale povrniti le potrebne stroške žrtev glede njihove udeležbe v kazenskih postopkih, ne pa tudi njihovih stroškov postopka.
Member States should be able to impose conditions in regard to the reimbursement of expenses in national law, such as time limits for claiming reimbursement, standard rates for subsistence and travel costs and maximum daily amounts for loss of earnings.
Države članice bi morale imeti možnost, da v nacionalni zakonodaji določijo pogoje v zvezi s povračilom stroškov, kot na primer roke za vložitev zahtevka za povračilo stroškov, standardne zneske za dnevnice in potne stroške ter najvišje dnevne zneske zaradi izgube prihodka.
The right to reimbursement of expenses in criminal proceedings should not arise in a situation where a victim makes a statement on a criminal offence.
Do pravice do povračila stroškov v kazenskem postopku ne bi smelo priti v primeru, ko žrtev poda izjavo o kaznivem dejanju.
Expenses should only be covered to the extent that the victim is obliged or requested by the competent authorities to be present and actively participate in the criminal proceedings.
Stroške bi bilo treba kriti le v obsegu, v katerem mora biti žrtev prisotna in dejavno sodelovati v kazenskem postopku oziroma jo k temu pozovejo pristojni organi.
Recoverable property which is seized in criminal proceedings should be returned as soon as possible to the victim of the crime, subject to exceptional circumstances, such as in a dispute concerning the ownership or where the possession of the property or the property itself is illegal.
Vračljivo premoženje, zaseženo v kazenskem postopku, bi bilo treba žrtvam kaznivih dejanj čim prej vrniti, razen če so podane izjemne okoliščine, na primer če obstaja spor glede njegovega lastništva ali če je lastništvo premoženja ali premoženje samo nezakonito.
The right to have property returned should be without prejudice to its legitimate retention for the purposes of other legal proceedings.
Pravica do vračanja premoženja naj ne bi posegala v njegovo zakonito zadržanje za namene drugega pravnega postopka.
The right to a decision on compensation from the offender and the relevant applicable procedure should also apply to victims resident in a Member State other than the Member State where the criminal offence was committed.
Pravica do odločitve, s katero se storilcu naloži plačilo odškodnine, in ustrezni veljavni postopek bi se morala uporabljati tudi za žrtve s prebivališčem v državi članici, ki ni država članica, v kateri je bilo storjeno kaznivo dejanje.
The obligation set out in this Directive to transmit complaints should not affect Member States' competence to institute proceedings and is without prejudice to the rules of conflict relating to the exercise of jurisdiction, as laid down in Council Framework Decision 2009/948/JHA of 30 November 2009 on prevention and settlement of conflicts of exercise of jurisdiction in criminal proceedings [13].
Obveznost iz te direktive o prenosu prijav ne bi smela vplivati na pristojnost držav članic za začetek postopka in ne posega v kolizijska pravila, povezana z izvajanjem pristojnosti, iz Okvirnega sklepa Sveta 2009/948/PNZ z dne 30. novembra 2009 o preprečevanju in reševanju sporov o izvajanju pristojnosti v kazenskih postopkih [13].
If the victim has left the territory of the Member State where the criminal offence was committed, that Member State should no longer be obliged to provide assistance, support and protection except for what is directly related to any criminal proceedings it is conducting regarding the criminal offence concerned, such as special protection measures during court proceedings.
Če žrtev zapusti ozemlje države članice, v kateri je bilo storjeno kaznivo dejanje, navedena država članica ne bi smela biti več obvezana nuditi pomoč, podporo in zaščito, razen v primerih, ki so neposredno povezani z morebitnimi potekajočimi kazenskimi postopki v zvezi z zadevnim kaznivim dejanjem, kot so posebni zaščitni ukrepi med sodno obravnavo.
The Member State of the victim's residence should provide assistance, support and protection required for the victim's need to recover.
Država članica, v kateri ima žrtev prebivališče, bi morala zagotoviti pomoč, podporo in zaščito, ki jo žrtev potrebuje za okrevanje.