natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
However, the Commission considers that the legal obligation imposed on RTP to provide ‘other services to be specified on an ad hoc basis’ [86] is not sufficiently precise to enable the Commission to assess beforehand with sufficient legal certainty whether such services can be considered as a public service.
Vendar pa Komisija meni, da pravna obveznost, dodeljena javni televiziji RTP glede zagotavljanja „drugih storitev, ki bodo vsaka posebej podrobneje določene“ [86], ni dovolj natančna, da bi Komisija lahko z zadostno pravno gotovostjo vnaprej ocenila, ali se lahko take storitve štejejo za javno službo.
Although it takes the view that the ‘other services to be specified’ are not clearly defined, it notes that no payments were made under this provision during the period under investigation [87].
Čeprav Komisija meni, da „druge storitve, ki bodo podrobneje določene“ niso jasno opredeljene, ugotavlja, da med obdobjem preiskave pod to postavko niso bila izvedena nobena plačila [87].
In view of the foregoing, the Commission concludes that the activities of RTP as described in Law No 21/92 and redefined in the public service contracts are clearly defined public service obligations.
Komisija je ob upoštevanju navedenega sklenila, da so dejavnosti javne televizije RTP, kot so opisane v Zakonu št. 21/92 in ponovno opredeljene v pogodbah o izvajanju javne službe, jasno opredeljene obveznosti javne službe.
Although the obligation to provide ‘other services to be provided on an ad hoc basis’ is not sufficiently precise for it to be concluded beforehand that all the services provided under this heading could be considered public services, no payments were made under this provision in the period from 1992 to 1998.
Čeprav obveznost glede zagotavljanja „drugih storitev, ki bodo vsaka posebej podrobneje določene“, ni dovolj natančna, da bi Komisija lahko vnaprej ugotovila, ali se vse določene obveznosti pod tem naslovom lahko štejejo za javno službo, pod to postavko v obdobju 1992–1998 niso bila izvedena nobena plačila.
However, the permanent exemption from registration and other charges is not limited to the compensation of a public service cost and can therefore not be justified under Article 106(2) TFEU.
Vendar pa trajna oprostitev plačila registracijskih taks in drugih stroškov ni omejena na nadomestitev stroškov javne službe in je zato ni mogoče utemeljiti na podlagi člena 106(2) PDEU.
Entrustment/supervision
Pooblastitev/nadzor
Secondly, it is necessary to assess whether the public service obligations were entrusted to the recipient RTP of the State funding.
Drugič, treba je oceniti, ali je bila prejemnica državnih sredstev, javna televizija RTP, pooblaščena za izvajanje obveznosti javne službe.
In line with the Broadcasting Communication, the Commission has to verify whether the public service remit has been entrusted to RTP by means of an official act [88].
Komisija mora v skladu s Sporočilom o radiodifuziji preveriti, ali je bila javna televizija RTP za opravljanje javne službe pooblaščena z uradnim aktom [88].
As referred to in recital 48 of this Decision, the public service obligations are clearly entrusted to RTP under various laws and contracts: Article 5 of Law No 58/90, Article 4(1) and Article 5 of Law No 21/92 and clause 1 of the old and new public service contracts.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 48 tega sklepa, je javna televizija RTP nedvomno pooblaščena za izvajanje obveznosti javne službe na podlagi različnih zakonov in pogodb: člena 5 Zakona št. 58/90, člena 4(1) in člena 5 Zakona št. 21/92 ter klavzule 1 stare in nove pogodbe o izvajanju javne službe.
The Commission did not receive any comments from interested parties or Portugal to the effect that the public service was not sufficiently entrusted to RTP by means of an official act.
Komisija ni prejela nobenih pripomb zainteresiranih strani ali Portugalske, da javna televizija RTP za opravljanje javne službe ni bila ustrezno pooblaščena z uradnim aktom.
In line with the Broadcasting Communication and in view of the laws and contracts referred to in recital 48 of this Decision, it should be concluded that there is RTP undoubtedly must perform the public service television obligations and a public service remit has, therefore, been officially entrusted to RTP.
V skladu s Sporočilom o radiodifuziji ter ob upoštevanju zakonov in pogodb iz uvodne izjave 48 tega sklepa je treba skleniti, da mora javna televizija RTP brez dvoma izvajati obveznosti javne radiotelevizije, zato je bila javna televizija RTP uradno pooblaščena za opravljanje javne službe.
Not only is it necessary that the public service be entrusted to RTP by means of an official act; steps should also be taken to ensure that the public service is provided as required by the law and the public service contracts As referred to in recitals 49 to 59 of this Decision., different control mechanisms were in place to ensure that RTP carried out the public service obligations in the manner provided for.
Ne samo, da mora biti javna televizija RTP za opravljanje javne službe pooblaščena z uradnim aktom; morali bi biti sprejeti ustrezni ukrepi, ki bi zagotavljali, da se javna služba izvaja v skladu z zakonodajo in pogodbama o izvajanju javne službe. Kot je navedeno v uvodnih izjavah 49–59 tega sklepa, so bili vzpostavljeni različni nadzorni mehanizmi, ki so zagotavljali, da je javna televizija RTP ustrezno izvajala obveznosti javne službe.
Firstly, RTP was required to provide reports on the performance of its public service obligations and plans accompanied by an opinion of its internal board of auditors.
Prvič, javna televizija RTP je morala predložiti poročila o izvajanju svojih obveznosti javne službe in načrtov, ki jih je spremljalo mnenje njenega notranjega revizijskega sveta.
RTP produced public service reports in for the years 1993 to 1998 that described the fulfilment of each public service obligation and identified the costs of each public service obligation through an analytical accounting system.
Javna televizija RTP je poročila o izvajanju javne službe pripravila za leta 1993–1998, v njih pa je bilo opisano izpolnjevanje vsake obveznosti javne službe in opredeljeni stroški vsake obveznosti javne službe, ki so bili izračunani z analitičnim računovodskim sistemom.
Secondly, the Minister of Finance and the responsible government member for mass media audited the observance of the public service contract and the Inspector General of Finances audited the financial plan.
Drugič, minister za finance in član vlade, pristojen za sredstva javnega obveščanja, sta preverila spoštovanje pogodb o izvajanju javne službe, generalni inšpektor za finance pa je revidiral finančni načrt.
Thirdly, annual external auditing had to take place.
Tretjič, morala je biti opravljena zunanja revizija.
The Commission cannot accept the argument by Portugal, repeated after the judgment of the Court in Case T-442/03, that in fact the public service reports were externally audited and that thus no further action was necessary.
Komisija se ne more strinjati s trditvijo Portugalske, ki jo je ponovila po sodbi Sodišča v zadevi T-442/03, da je bila zunanja revizija poročil o izvajanju javne službe dejansko opravljena in da nadaljnje ukrepanje ni potrebno.
The situation before the adoption of Decision of 15 October 2003 may be described as follows:
Razmere pred sprejetjem Odločbe z dne 15. oktobra 2003 je mogoče opisati, kot sledi:
for the year 1992, no public service report existed, as the obligation to provide public service reports and an audit on such reports first came into place with the concession contract of 1993;
za leto 1992 poročilo o izvajanju javne službe ni bilo pripravljeno, saj je obveznost glede predložitve poročil o izvajanju javne službe in revizije takih poročil začela veljati s pogodbo o koncesiji leta 1993;
for the years 1993 and 1994, there was no external audit, just a statement by the company representatives, namely of the Fiscal Council of RTP (Conselho fiscal da RTP), which is merely internal to the company;
za leti 1993 in 1994 ni bila opravljena nobena zunanja revizija, priložena je bila samo izjava predstavnikov podjetja, namreč fiskalnega sveta javne televizije RTP (Conselho fiscal da RTP), ki pa je samo notranji organ podjetja;
for the years 1995 to 1998, a statement by an external auditor independent from RTP and its representatives accompanied the reports.
za leta 1995–1998 je bila poročilom priložena izjava zunanjega revizorja, ki je neodvisen od javne televizije RTP in njenih predstavnikov.
Those statements confirm that RTP respected its public service obligations.
Te izjave potrjujejo, da je javna televizija RTP izpolnjevala svoje obveznosti javne službe.
No more detailed public service reports which led to these findings could however be accessed.
Podrobnejša poročila o izvajanju javne službe, na katerih so temeljile te ugotovitve, niso bila dostopna.
However, in view of the findings of the Court in Case T-442/03 and in particular in paragraphs 232 to 256 of the judgment, the Commission could not rely exclusively on the (short) audit statements on the public service reports referred to in recital 177 of this Decision and instead accepted Portugal’s offer to carry out an external audit on the basis of the existing public service reports for all the years concerned.
Vendar pa se Komisija ob upoštevanju ugotovitev Sodišča v zadevi T-442/03 in zlasti točk 232–256 sodbe ni mogla zanašati samo na (kratka) revizijska poročila poročil o izvajanju javne službe iz uvodne izjave 177 tega sklepa in je namesto tega sprejela ponudbo Portugalske, da izvede zunanjo revizijo na podlagi obstoječih poročil o izvajanju javne službe za vsa zadevna leta.
However, the external auditor relied on other document to assess whether the public service mandate had been fulfilled.
Zunanji revizor se je za oceno, ali so bile naloge javne službe izpolnjene, zanašal na druge dokumente.
For the year 1998, no external audit has been performed, as there always existed, undisputed also by SIC, an external audit in form of the BDO Binder report 1998, which is referred to later in recitals 186-188 of this Decision.
Za leto 1998 zunanja revizija ni bila izvedena, saj je bila na voljo zunanja revizija v obliki poročila revizorja BDO Binder iz leta 1998, ki mu ni oporekala niti komercialna televizija SIC in je obravnavano v uvodnih izjavah 186–188 tega sklepa.
The new audits for the years 1992 to 1997 have been organised by the national media regulator, namely the Entidade Reguladora para a Comunicação Social, ERC.
Nove revizije za leta 1992–1997 je organiziral nacionalni regulativni organ za medije, Entidade Reguladora para a Comunicaçăo Social (ERC).
The ERC is an independent administrative body which, in accordance with the Portuguese Constitution, is responsible for ensuring, among other things, the respect for the statutes and rules governing mass media activity.
Regulativni organ ERC je neodvisen upravni organ, ki je v skladu s portugalsko ustavo med drugim odgovoren za zagotavljanje spoštovanja statutov in predpisov, ki urejajo dejavnosti množičnih medijev.
It organised audits to be carried out for the years from 1992 until 1997 by contracting with the external auditor, Pedro Roque, which is independent of RTP.
Za zunanje revizije za leta 1992–1997 je najel zunanjega revizorja, družbo Pedro Roque, ki je neodvisen od javne televizije RTP.
Given the time elapse between 1992 and the public service report audits carried out in 2010, it has been difficult to access all the data.
Glede na čas, ki je pretekel od leta 1992 do revizij poročil o izvajanju javne službe v letu 2010, je bilo težko oceniti vse podatke.
This explained the length of the investigation and the time it took to conduct new audits.
To je razlog za dolgo trajanje preiskave in čas, potreben za izvedbo novih revizij.
However, in the end, the audits could be carried out, as the public service reports already (except for the year 1992) existed and the auditors thus had a basis for their audit.
Vendar pa je bilo na koncu revizije mogoče izvesti, saj so poročila o izvajanju javne službe (razen za leto 1992) že obstajala in revizorji so tako imeli osnovo za svojo revizijo.
The audits for the years from 1992 to 1997 have been submitted to the Commission.
Revizije za obdobje 1992–1997 so bile predložene Komisiji.
The external audits state that their mandate is to assess and monitor the public broadcasting service, as provided by RTP and the payment received by it for that task.
Zunanje revizije navajajo, da je njihova naloga oceniti in spremljati storitve javne radiotelevizije, kot jih je zagotavljala javna televizija RTP, in plačilo, ki ga je le-ta prejela za to nalogo.
They contain a description of the information taken into account.
Obsegajo opis informacij, ki so bile upoštevane.
They refer, inter alia, to Law No 58/90 (Public service broadcasting Act, Law No 21/92 on the transformation of RTP, the public service contracts, the yearly accounts and the external audits on the yearly accounts, the Public Business Plan and Budget (Plano de Actividades e Orçamento do Serviço Público), the public service reports for the respective years (Relatorio sobre o Cumprimento das Obrigaçaoes do Servico Publico, RCOSP). The audits mention that due to the long period of time which elapsed between the years 1992 to 1997 and the auditing contract in 2010, some documents were destroyed and certain information was not available. For that reason, the audit report mainly focused on the available reports, in particular the public service reports [89] and the certified annual accounts.
Med drugim navajajo Zakon št. 58/90 (Zakon o storitvah javne radiotelevizije), Zakon št. 21/92 o preoblikovanju javne televizije RTP, pogodbi o izvajanju javne službe, letne računovodske izkaze in zunanje revizije letnih računovodskih izkazov, javni poslovni načrt in proračun (Plano de Actividades e Orçamento do Serviço Público) ter poročila o izvajanju javne službe za zadevna leta (Relatorio sobre o Cumprimento das Obrigacaoes do Servico Publico, RCOSP). V revizijah je navedeno, da so bili zaradi dolgega časovnega obdobja, ki je preteklo med letoma 1992 in 1997 ter revizijsko pogodbo v letu 2010 nekateri dokumenti uničeni, nekatere informacije pa niso bile na voljo. Zato se je poročilo o reviziji osredotočilo v glavnem na razpoložljiva poročila, zlasti poročila o izvajanju javne službe [89] in konsolidirane letne računovodske izkaze.
Despite those constraints due to the lapse of time, the auditors found it possible to fulfil their contract and carry out the audits and make an assessment of the fulfilment of RTP’s public service obligation and the compensation received by it.
Kljub tem omejitvam zaradi pretečenega časa so revizorji lahko izpolnili svojo pogodbo, izvedli revizijo ter ocenili izpolnjevanje obveznosti javne službe s strani javne televizije RTP, in nadomestilo, ki ga je le-ta prejela.
The audits expressly state that the auditors were able to surmount the difficulties incurred to the lapse of time and carryout out the audits.
Revizija izrecno navaja, da so revizorji uspeli prebroditi težave, ki so nastale zaradi preteklega časa, in izvedli revizijo.
For example, while the auditors make the reservation that the cost accounting criteria and methods of cost allocations were not able to be consulted, that did not prove to be an impediment for carrying out the audit and for coming to a positive conclusion.
Na primer, revizorji so sicer izrazili pridržek glede tega, da ni bilo mogoče uporabiti meril stroškovnega računovodstva in metod za razporejanje stroškov, vendar jih to pri reviziji ni oviralo in svoje delo so lahko uspešno zaključili.
The cost allocation criteria and are therefore only relevant for placing cost allocation within the public service costs incurred by RTP and should not have any effect on the amount of the total public service costs.
Merila za razporejanje stroškov so zato pomembna samo zaradi umestitve razporejanja stroškov v okvir stroškov javne službe, ki jih je imela javna televizija RTP, in ne bi smela imeti nobenega vpliva na znesek skupnih stroškov javne službe.
As regards the financial information, the Commission found that the external auditors could legitimately rely on the annual financial accounts, which were always accompanied by an audit certifying the accuracy of the accounts of RTP.
Glede finančnih informacij je Komisija ugotovila, da so se lahko zunanji revizorji upravičeno zanašali na letna finančna poročila, ki so jim bile vedno priložene revizije, ki so potrdile natančnost poročil javne televizije RTP.
According to the public service contracts, the objective of the external audit on the public service report was to verify that RTP had fulfilled its public service obligations as mandated and that the public service compensation is in line with these costs performing such obligations.
V skladu s pogodbama o izvajanju javne službe je bil namen zunanje revizije poročila o izvajanju javne službe preveriti, ali je javna televizija RTP izpolnila svoje obveznosti javne službe, kot so ji bile naložene, in ali je nadomestilo javnih stroškov v skladu s stroški, nastalimi pri izvajanju teh obveznosti.
Therefore, while the financial data for the public service provision during the years under investigation related to the provision of public service by RTP, a further independent verification was necessary to ascertain whether the costs incurred complied with the public service mandate.
Finančni podatki za zagotavljanje javne službe v letih, ki so bila predmet revizije, so bili povezani z zagotavljanjem javne službe s strani javne televizije RTP, vendar pa je bilo potrebno nadaljnje neodvisno preverjanje, da bi ugotovili, ali so bili stroški, ki so nastali, v skladu z nalogami javne službe.
The external auditors confirm that point.
Zunanji revizorji so to potrdili.
For the years 1992-97, the auditors come to the conclusion that: ‘RTP had essentially fulfilled its broadcasting obligations in terms of quantity, as set out in the concession contract, with a special focus on the Broadcasting Content obligation’.
Za obdobje 1992–1997 so revizorji ugotovili, da: „je javna televizija RTP v glavnem izpolnila svoje obveznosti razširjanja programskih vsebin glede količine, kot je določeno v pogodbi o koncesiji, s posebnim poudarkom na obveznosti glede programskih vsebin“.
The auditor finds that ‘having analysed the documents available, namely the reports of the Auditor and the Statutory Audit Committee, we did not find anything that would lead us to conclude that the documents presented, relating to the correspondence between the public service tasks provided and the payment of their real and actual cost, contain materially relevant distortions that affect their compliance with the legislation in force on that date’ [91].
Revizor navaja, da „po analizi razpoložljivih dokumentov, tj. poročil revizorja in zakonitega revizijskega odbora, niso ugotovili ničesar, na podlagi česar bi lahko sklepali, da predloženi dokumenti, ki se nanašajo na povezavo med opravljenimi nalogami javne službe in plačilom njihovih dejanskih stroškov, vsebujejo bistvena izkrivljanja, ki bi vplivala na njihovo skladnost s takrat veljavno zakonodajo“ [91].
A number of audit reports mention that RTP could have requested a higher amount of compensation but was prevented from doing so due to the terms of the public service contracts, due to Article 15(4) of the old public service contract and Article 19(3) of the 1996 new public service contract.
V številnih poročilih o reviziji je navedeno, da bi lahko javna televizija RTP zahtevala višji znesek nadomestila, vendar so ji to preprečili pogoji pogodb o izvajanju javne službe zaradi člena 15(4) stare pogodbe o izvajanju javne službe in člen 19(3) nove pogodbe o izvajanju javne službe iz leta 1996.
The individual external audits for the years 1994, 1996 and 1997 contain statements regarding the difference between the high costs actually incurred by RTP for providing the public service and the compensation received by it which was less than the costs incurred [92].
Posamezne revizije za leta 1994, 1996 in 1997 obsegajo izjave glede razlike med visokimi stroški, ki jih je javna televizija RTP dejansko imela zaradi izvajanja javne službe, in nadomestilom, ki ga je prejela in je bilo nižje od nastalih stroškov [92].
The final synthesis report for all the years which have been audited states explicitly that: ‘for all years, the compensatory indemnification that was attributed and paid was inferior to the amounts indicated in each RCOPS (Relatório sobre o cumprimento das obrigações de serviço público, the public service reports)’ [93].
Končno zbirno poročilo za vsa revidirana leta izrecno navaja, da: „je bilo za vsa leta nadomestilo, ki je bilo dodeljeno in plačano, nižje od zneskov, navedenih v vsakem od RCOPS (Relatório sobre o cumprimento das obrigações de serviço público, poročila o izvajanju javne službe)“ [93].
Certain audits (with the exception of those for the years 1992 and 1993), state that RTP exceeded the legal advertising limit, i.e. it broadcasted more advertisements than it was permitted to do by the public service contracts.
V nekaterih revizijah (razen tistih za leti 1992 in 1993) je navedeno, da je javna televizija RTP presegla zakonsko določeno omejitev oglaševanja, tj. da je predvajala več oglasov, kot sta ji to dovoljevali pogodbi o izvajanju javne službe.
The revenue that RTP received for such advertising must be taken into account for calculating the public service costs, in accordance with the Broadcasting Communication, as income generated by the public service, including advertising revenues, should be integrated into the calculation of the company’s public service financing need.
Prihodek, ki ga je javna televizija prejela za tako oglaševanje, je treba upoštevati pri izračunu stroškov izvajanja javne službe v skladu s Sporočilom o radiodifuziji, saj je treba prihodek, ustvarjen z javno službo, vključno s prihodki od oglaševanja, upoštevati pri izračunu potrebe podjetja po financiranju javne službe.
The fact that advertising limits were exceeded did not affect the auditor’s analysis that for all 1992-97 the public service compensation corresponded to the public service tasks carried out by RTP and there was no overcompensation.
Dejstvo, da so bile omejitve oglaševanja presežene, ni vplivalo na revizorjevo analizo, da so nadomestila za izvajanje javne službe v vseh letih v obdobju 1992–1997 ustrezala nalogam javne službe, ki jih je izvajala javna televizija RTP, in da nadomestila niso bila prekomerna.
Portugal also confirmed that in respect of the years 1994, 1995 and 1996, all advertising profits (so including those resulting from an excess of allowed advertising time) were taken into account and reduced the public service financing need respectively [94].
Portugalska je tudi potrdila, da so bili za leta 1994, 1995 in 1996 upoštevani vsi prihodki od oglaševanja (tudi tisti, pridobljeni na podlagi presežka dovoljenega oglaševanja), ki so precej zmanjšali potrebo po financiranju javne službe [94].
As regards the year 1996, article 15 in the new public service contract stipulated that, for the determination of the compensation the profits resulting from the exploitation of the channels, may not be taken into account when summed the costs for the purposes of calculating the total cost of the public service.
V letu 1996 je člen 15 nove pogodbe o izvajanju javne službe določal, da se zaradi določanja višine nadomestila dobička, dobljenega na podlagi uporabe kanalov, ne sme upoštevati pri računanju stroškov za namene izračuna celotnih stroškov, nastalih pri izvajanju javne službe.
The ‘profits’ includes the advertising revenues.
Pojem „dobiček“ obsega tudi prihodke od oglaševanja.
Portugal explicitly confirmed that the advertising profits were deducted from the amount of compensation required [95].
Portugalska je izrecno potrdila, da so bili prihodki od oglaševanja odšteti od zneska zahtevanega nadomestila [95].
As regards the year 1998, the external BDO Binder carried out an investigation regarding the relationship between RTP’s public service remit and the costs related thereto.
V letu 1998 je zunanji revizor BDO Binder raziskal povezavo med nalogami javne službe, ki jih je imela javna televizija RTP, in stroški, povezanimi s temi nalogami.