natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 28 February 2014 at the latest.
Države članice sprejmejo zakone in druge predpise, potrebne za uskladitev s to direktivo, najpozneje do 28. februarja 2014.
of 2 October 2013
z dne 2. oktobra 2013
Commission Directive 2012/36/EU of 19 November 2012 amending Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on driving licences [2] provides for technical adaptation of its Annex II in relation to the specifications for test vehicles taking into account the technical evolution of the different vehicle classes.
Direktiva Komisije 2012/36/EU z dne 19. novembra 2012 o spremembi Direktive 2006/126/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o vozniških dovoljenjih [2] predvideva tehnično prilagoditev Priloge II glede specifikacij za testna vozila, pri čemer je treba upoštevati tehnični razvoj različnih razredov vozil.
Annex II, I, B point 5.2 of Directive 2006/126/EC, as amended by Directive 2012/36/EU, establishes that the vehicles of category A used in tests of skills and behaviour shall comply with certain minimum criteria.
Točka 5.2 dela I(B) Priloge II k Direktivi 2006/126/ES, kot je bila spremenjena z Direktivo Komisije 2012/36/EU, določa, da vozila kategorije A, ki se uporabljajo pri preizkusih spretnosti in ravnanja, ustrezajo nekaterim minimalnim merilom.
In particular, motorcycles used for the test shall have an unladen mass of more than 180 kg, with a power rating of at least 50 kW.
Zlasti velja, da je masa motornih koles, ki se uporabljajo pri preizkusih, brez tovora in potnikov večja od 180 kg, njihova moč pa vsaj 50 kW.
If the motorcycle is powered by an internal combustion engine, the cubic capacity of the engine shall be at least 600 cm3.
Če motorno kolo poganja motor z notranjim izgorevanjem, je prostornina motorja vsaj 600 cm3.
If the motorcycle is powered by an electric motor, the power to weight ratio of the vehicle shall be at least 0,25 kW/kg.
Če motorno kolo poganja električni motor, je razmerje med močjo in težo vozila najmanj 0,25 kW/kg.
With a view to allowing the training sector to adapt their equipment including motorcycles to technological evolution of the vehicles available on the market, a transitional period should be introduced to allow Member States to authorise the use of category A motorcycles complying with the specifications as existing prior to the amendments introduced by Directive 2012/36/EU until 31 December 2018.
Da bi v sektorju usposabljanja opremo in motorna kolesa lahko prilagodili tehnološkemu razvoju vozil na trgu, bi bilo treba uvesti prehodno obdobje do 31. decembra 2018, v katerem bi države članice lahko dovolile uporabo motornih koles kategorije A, skladnih z določbami, ki so veljale pred spremembami, uvedenimi z Direktivo 2012/36/EU.
In Annex II, I, B, point 5.2 of Directive 2006/126/EC concerning vehicles for category A, the following paragraph is added:
V točki 5.2 dela I(B) Priloge II k Direktivi 2006/126/ES se glede vozil kategorije A doda naslednji odstavek:
‘Member States may authorise the use of motorcycles of category A whose unladen mass is below 180 kg, and with a power rating of at least 40 kW and below 50 kW, until 31 December 2018.’
„Države članice lahko do 31. decembra 2018 dovolijo uporabo motornih koles kategorije A, katerih masa brez tovora ali potnikov ne presega 180 kg, in katerih moč je vsaj 40 kW vendar manj kot 50 kW.“
Done at Brussels, 2 October 2013.
V Bruslju, 2. oktobra 2013
Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 31 December 2013 at the latest.
Države članice najpozneje do 31. decembra 2013 sprejmejo zakone in druge predpise, potrebne za uskladitev s to direktivo.
Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council
Direktiva 2013/48/EU Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta
on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty
o pravici do dostopa do odvetnika v kazenskem postopku in v postopkih na podlagi evropskega naloga za prijetje ter pravici do obvestitve tretje osebe ob odvzemu prostosti in do komunikacije s tretjimi osebami in konzularnimi organi med odvzemom prostosti
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular point (b) of Article 82(2) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije in zlasti točke (b) člena 82(2) Pogodbe,
Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter), Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the ECHR) and Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the ICCPR) enshrine the right to a fair trial.
Člen 47 Listine Evropske unije o temeljnih pravicah (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Listina), člen 6 Evropske konvencije o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin (v nadaljnjem besedilu: EKČP) ter člen 14 Mednarodnega pakta o državljanskih in političnih pravicah (v nadaljnjem besedilu: MPDPP) določajo pravico do poštenega sojenja.
Article 48(2) of the Charter guarantees respect for the rights of the defence.
Člen 48(2) Listine zagotavlja spoštovanje pravice do obrambe.
According to the Presidency conclusions of the European Council in Tampere of 15 and 16 October 1999, and in particular point (33) thereof, the principle of mutual recognition of judgments and other decisions of judicial authorities should become the cornerstone of judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters within the Union because enhanced mutual recognition and the necessary approximation of legislation would facilitate cooperation between competent authorities and the judicial protection of individual rights.
V skladu s sklepi predsedstva Evropskega sveta iz Tampereja z dne 15. in 16. oktobra 1999, zlasti s točko (33) sklepov, bi moralo načelo vzajemnega priznavanja sodb in drugih odločb pravosodnih organov postati temelj pravosodnega sodelovanja v civilnih in kazenskih zadevah v Uniji, saj bi se z okrepljenim vzajemnim priznavanjem in potrebnim približevanjem zakonodaje izboljšala sodelovanje med pristojnimi organi in sodno varstvo pravic posameznika.
Pursuant to Article 82(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), ‘judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the Union shall be based on the principle of mutual recognition of judgments and judicial decisions…’.
Na podlagi člena 82(1) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije (v nadaljnjem besedilu: PDEU) temelji „pravosodno sodelovanje v kazenskih zadevah v Uniji na načelu vzajemnega priznavanja sodb in sodnih odločb …“.
The extent of the mutual recognition is very much dependent on a number of parameters, which include mechanisms for safeguarding the rights of suspects or accused persons and common minimum standards necessary to facilitate the application of the principle of mutual recognition.
Obseg vzajemnega priznavanja je močno odvisen od več elementov, ki vključujejo mehanizme za varovanje pravic osumljenih ali obdolženih oseb in skupne minimalne standarde, potrebne za lažje uresničevanje načela vzajemnega priznavanja.
Although the Member States are party to the ECHR and to the ICCPR, experience has shown that that alone does not always provide a sufficient degree of trust in the criminal justice systems of other Member States.
Čeprav so države članice pogodbenice EKČP in MPDPP, izkušnje kažejo, da to samo po sebi ne zagotavlja vedno zadostnega zaupanja v kazenskopravne sisteme drugih držav članic.
Mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters can operate effectively only in a spirit of trust in which not only judicial authorities, but all actors in the criminal process consider decisions of the judicial authorities of other Member States as equivalent to their own, implying not only trust in the adequacy of other Member States’ rules, but also trust that those rules are correctly applied.
Vzajemno priznavanje odločb v kazenskih zadevah lahko deluje učinkovito le v duhu zaupanja, v katerem ne le pravosodni organi, temveč vsi udeleženci v kazenskem postopku priznavajo odločbe pravosodnih organov drugih držav članic kot enakovredne svojim lastnim, kar pomeni ne le zaupanja v ustreznost pravil drugih držav članic, ampak tudi zaupanje v pravilno uporabo teh pravil.
Strengthening mutual trust requires detailed rules on the protection of the procedural rights and guarantees arising from the Charter, the ECHR and the ICCPR.
Za okrepitev medsebojnega zaupanja so potrebna podrobna pravila o varstvu procesnih pravic in jamstev, ki izhajajo iz Listine, EKČP in MPDPP.
It also requires, by means of this Directive and by means of other measures, further development within the Union of the minimum standards set out in the Charter and in the ECHR.
Prav tako je treba s to direktivo in z drugimi ukrepi v Uniji nadalje razviti minimalne standarde iz Listine in EKČP.
Article 82(2) TFEU provides for the establishment of minimum rules applicable in the Member States so as to facilitate mutual recognition of judgments and judicial decisions and police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters having a cross-border dimension.
V členu 82(2) PDEU je določeno, da se uvedejo minimalna pravila, ki se uporabljajo v državah članicah in s katerimi je olajšano vzajemno priznavanje sodb in sodnih odločb ter policijsko in pravosodno sodelovanje v kazenskih zadevah s čezmejnimi posledicami.
Common minimum rules should lead to increased confidence in the criminal justice systems of all Member States, which, in turn, should lead to more efficient judicial cooperation in a climate of mutual trust and to the promotion of a fundamental rights culture in the Union.
Skupna minimalna pravila bi morala privesti do okrepljenega zaupanja v kazenskopravne sisteme vseh držav članic, to pa bi moralo voditi do učinkovitejšega pravosodnega sodelovanja v duhu medsebojnega zaupanja ter do spodbujanja kulture temeljnih pravic v Uniji.
Such common minimum rules should also remove obstacles to the free movement of citizens throughout the territory of the Member States.
Takšna skupna minimalna pravila bi prav tako morala odpraviti ovire za prosto gibanje državljanov na ozemlju vseh držav članic.
Such common minimum rules should be established in relation to the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings, the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and the right to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty.
Takšna skupna minimalna pravila bi bilo treba uvesti v zvezi s pravico do dostopa do odvetnika v kazenskem postopku, pravico do obvestitve tretje osebe ob odvzemu prostosti in pravico do komunikacije s tretjimi osebami in konzularnimi organi med odvzemom prostosti.
On 30 November 2009, the Council adopted a Resolution on a Roadmap for strengthening the procedural rights of suspected or accused persons in criminal proceedings (‘the Roadmap’) [3].
Svet je 30. novembra 2009 sprejel Resolucijo o načrtu za krepitev procesnih pravic osumljenih ali obtoženih oseb v kazenskih postopkih (v nadaljnjem besedilu: načrt) [3].
Taking a step-by-step approach, the Roadmap calls for the adoption of measures regarding the right to translation and interpretation (measure A), the right to information on rights and information about the charges (measure B), the right to legal advice and legal aid (measure C), the right to communicate with relatives, employers and consular authorities (measure D), and special safeguards for suspects or accused persons who are vulnerable (measure E).
V načrtu je predvideno postopno sprejetje ukrepov glede pravice do prevajanja in tolmačenja (ukrep A), pravice do obveščenosti o pravicah in obtožbi (ukrep B), pravice do pravnega svetovanja in pravne pomoči (ukrep C), pravice do komuniciranja s sorodniki, delodajalci in konzularnimi organi (ukrep D) ter glede posebnega varstva za osumljene ali obdolžene osebe, ki spadajo med ranljive osebe (ukrep E).
The Roadmap emphasises that the order of the rights is only indicative and thus implies that it may be changed in accordance with priorities.
V načrtu je poudarjeno, da je vrstni red pravic le okviren, kar pomeni, da se lahko spreminja v skladu s prednostnimi nalogami.
The Roadmap is designed to operate as a whole; only when all its components are implemented will its benefits be felt in full.
Načrt je zasnovan tako, da deluje kot celota; njegove koristi bodo popolnoma razvidne šele, ko bodo izvedeni vsi njegovi sestavni deli.
On 11 December 2009, the European Council welcomed the Roadmap and made it part of the Stockholm programme — An open and secure Europe serving and protecting citizens [4] (point 2.4).
Evropski svet je 11. decembra 2009 pozdravil načrt in ga vključil v Stockholmski program – odprta in varna Evropa, ki služi državljanom in jih varuje [4] (točka 2.4).
The European Council underlined the non-exhaustive character of the Roadmap, by inviting the Commission to examine further elements of minimum procedural rights for suspects and accused persons, and to assess whether other issues, for instance the presumption of innocence, need to be addressed, in order to promote better cooperation in that area.
Pri tem je poudaril, da načrt ni izčrpen, ter pozval Komisijo, naj preuči nadaljnje elemente minimalnih procesnih pravic osumljenih in obdolženih oseb ter oceni, ali je treba za boljše sodelovanje na tem področju preučiti tudi druga vprašanja, na primer domnevo nedolžnosti.
Two measures have been adopted pursuant to the Roadmap to date, namely Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings [5] and Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings [6].
Do zdaj sta bila sprejeta dva ukrepa na podlagi načrta, in sicer Direktiva 2010/64/EU Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 20. oktobra 2010 o pravici do tolmačenja in prevajanja v kazenskih postopkih [5] ter Direktiva 2012/13/EU Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 22. maja 2012 o pravici do obveščenosti v kazenskem postopku [6].
This Directive lays down minimum rules concerning the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in proceedings for the execution of a European arrest warrant pursuant to Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States [7] (European arrest warrant proceedings) and the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty.
Ta direktiva določa minimalna pravila glede pravice do dostopa do odvetnika v kazenskem postopku ter v postopku za izvedbo evropskega naloga za prijetje na podlagi Okvirnega sklepa Sveta 2002/584/PNZ z dne 13. junija 2002 o evropskem nalogu za prijetje in postopkih predaje med državami članicami [7] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: postopki na podlagi evropskega naloga za prijetje) in pravice do obvestitve tretje osebe ob odvzemu prostosti v kazenskem postopku in do komunikacije s tretjimi osebami in konzularnimi organi med odvzemom prostosti.
In doing so, it promotes the application of the Charter, in particular Articles 4, 6, 7, 47 and 48 thereof, by building upon Articles 3, 5, 6 and 8 ECHR, as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights, which, in its case-law, on an ongoing basis, sets standards on the right of access to a lawyer.
S tem spodbuja uporabo Listine, zlasti členov 4, 6, 7, 47 in 48 Listine, ter nadgrajuje člene 3, 5, 6 in 8 EKČP, kot jih razlaga Evropsko sodišče za človekove pravice, ki v svoji sodni praksi stalno določa standarde o pravici do dostopa do odvetnika.
That case-law provides, inter alia, that the fairness of proceedings requires that a suspect or accused person be able to obtain the whole range of services specifically associated with legal assistance.
V navedeni sodni praksi je med drugim določeno, da je zaradi poštenosti postopka treba zagotoviti, da lahko osumljena ali obdolžena oseba koristi vse storitve, ki so posebej povezane s pravno pomočjo.
In that regard, the lawyers of suspects or accused persons should be able to secure without restriction, the fundamental aspects of the defence.
Odvetnik osumljenih ali obdolženih oseb bi tako moral imeti možnost, da brez omejitev zagotovi temeljne vidike obrambe.
Without prejudice to the obligations of Member States under the ECHR to ensure the right to a fair trial, proceedings in relation to minor offending which take place within a prison and proceedings in relation to offences committed in a military context which are dealt with by a commanding officer should not be considered to be criminal proceedings for the purposes of this Directive.
Brez poseganja v obveznosti držav članic v okviru EKČP glede zagotavljanja pravice do poštenega sojenja se postopki v zvezi z manjšimi kršitvami, storjenimi v zaporu, in kršitvami, storjenimi v vojaškem okolju, ki jih obravnava poveljujoči častnik, za namene te direktive ne bi smeli razumeti kot kazenski postopki.
This Directive should be implemented taking into account the provisions of Directive 2012/13/EU, which provide that suspects or accused persons are provided promptly with information concerning the right of access to a lawyer, and that suspects or accused persons who are arrested or detained are provided promptly with a written Letter of Rights containing information about the right of access to a lawyer.
To direktivo bi bilo treba izvajati ob upoštevanju določb Direktive 2012/13/EU, ki določajo, da so osumljene ali obdolžene osebe nemudoma seznanjene s pravico do dostopa do odvetnika in da prijete ali pridržane osumljene ali obdolžene osebe nemudoma prejmejo pisno obvestilo o pravicah, ki bi moralo vključevati informacije o pravici do dostopa do odvetnika.
The term ‘lawyer’ in this Directive refers to any person who, in accordance with national law, is qualified and entitled, including by means of accreditation by an authorised body, to provide legal advice and assistance to suspects or accused persons.
V tej direktivi se izraz „odvetnik“ nanaša na vsako osebo, ki je v skladu z nacionalno zakonodajo usposobljena in upravičena (tudi na podlagi akreditacije s strani pristojnega organa) za pravno svetovanje in pomoč osumljenim ali obdolženim osebam.
In some Member States an authority other than a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters has competence for imposing sanctions other than deprivation of liberty in relation to relatively minor offences.
V nekaterih državah članicah je lahko za nalaganje sankcij, ki ne vključujejo odvzema prostosti, pri razmeroma manjših kršitvah pristojen organ, ki ni sodišče, pristojno za kazenske zadeve.
That may be the case, for example, in relation to traffic offences which are committed on a large scale and which might be established following a traffic control.
To je mogoče na primer pri pogostih prometnih prekrških, ki se lahko ugotovijo med kontrolo prometa.
In such situations, it would be unreasonable to require that the competent authorities ensure all the rights under this Directive.
V takšnih primerih bi bilo nerazumno od pristojnih organov zahtevati, da morajo zagotoviti vse pravice iz te direktive.
Where the law of a Member State provides for the imposition of a sanction regarding minor offences by such an authority and there is either a right of appeal or the possibility for the case to be otherwise referred to a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters, this Directive should therefore apply only to the proceedings before that court following such an appeal or referral.
Če zakonodaja države članice določa, da sankcije za manjše kršitve naloži takšen organ in bodisi obstaja pravica do pritožbe ali pa je mogoče zadevo drugače predložiti sodišču, pristojnemu za kazenske zadeve, bi se ta direktiva morala uporabljati le za postopke pred tem sodiščem po vložitvi pritožbe ali predložitvi zadeve.
In some Member States certain minor offences, in particular minor traffic offences, minor offences in relation to general municipal regulations and minor public order offences, are considered to be criminal offences.
V nekaterih državah članicah za kazniva dejanja veljajo nekatere manjše kršitve, zlasti manjše prometne kršitve, manjše kršitve v zvezi s splošnimi občinskimi predpisi in manjše kršitve javnega reda.
Where the law of a Member State provides in respect of minor offences that deprivation of liberty cannot be imposed as a sanction, this Directive should therefore apply only to the proceedings before a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters.
Če zakonodaja države članice v zvezi z manjšimi kršitvami določa, da odvzem prostosti kot sankcija ni mogoč, bi bilo treba to direktivo uporabljati le v postopkih pred sodiščem, pristojnim za kazenske zadeve.
The scope of application of this Directive in respect of certain minor offences should not affect the obligations of Member States under the ECHR to ensure the right to a fair trial including obtaining legal assistance from a lawyer.
Področje uporabe te direktive v zvezi z nekaterimi manjšimi kršitvami ne bi smelo vplivati na obveznosti držav članic v skladu z EKČP, da zagotovijo pravico do poštenega sojenja, tudi glede pravne pomoči odvetnika.
Member States should ensure that suspects or accused persons have the right of access to a lawyer without undue delay in accordance with this Directive.
Države članice bi morale osumljenim ali obdolženim osebam brez nepotrebnega odlašanja zagotoviti dostop do odvetnika v skladu s to direktivo.
In any event, suspects or accused persons should be granted access to a lawyer during criminal proceedings before a court, if they have not waived that right.
V vsakem primeru bi morale osumljene ali obdolžene osebe imeti pravico do dostopa do odvetnika v kazenskih postopkih pred sodiščem, če se tej pravici niso odpovedale.
For the purposes of this Directive, questioning does not include preliminary questioning by the police or by another law enforcement authority the purpose of which is to identify the person concerned, to verify the possession of weapons or other similar safety issues or to determine whether an investigation should be started, for example in the course of a road-side check, or during regular random checks when a suspect or accused person has not yet been identified.
Za namene te direktive „zaslišanje“ ne vključuje predhodnega zaslišanja, ki ga opravi policija ali drugi pristojni organ kazenskega pregona in katerega namen je identificirati zadevno osebo, preveriti, ali je oseba oborožena oziroma ali obstajajo drugi podobni varnostni zadržki, ali ugotoviti, ali je treba začeti preiskavo, na primer med prometno kontrolo ali rednim naključnim preverjanjem, če osumljena ali obdolžena oseba še ni bila identificirana.
Where a person other than a suspect or accused person, such as a witness, becomes a suspect or accused person, that person should be protected against self-incrimination and has the right to remain silent, as confirmed by the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights.
Kadar oseba, ki ni osumljena ali obdolžena, na primer priča, postane osumljena ali obdolžena, bi jo bilo treba zaščititi pred samoobtožbo in ima pravico do molka, kar potrjuje tudi sodna praksa Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice.
This Directive therefore makes express reference to the practical situation where such a person becomes a suspect or accused person during questioning by the police or by another law enforcement authority in the context of criminal proceedings.
Ta direktiva se zato izrecno sklicuje na primer, v katerem taka oseba postane osumljena ali obdolžena med zaslišanjem s strani policije ali drugega organa kazenskega pregona v okviru kazenskega postopka.