natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Legal remedies available against an EIO should be at least equal to those available in a domestic case against the investigative measure concerned.
Razpoložljiva pravna sredstva zoper EPN bi morala biti vsaj enaka pravnim sredstvom, ki so na voljo v notranjem primeru zoper zadevni preiskovalni ukrep.
In accordance with their national law Member States should ensure the applicability of such legal remedies, including by informing in due time any interested party about the possibilities and modalities for seeking those legal remedies.
Države članice bi morale v skladu s svojim nacionalnim pravom zagotoviti uporabljivost teh pravnih sredstev, vključno s pravočasnim obveščanjem vseh zainteresiranih strani o možnostih in načinih uporabe takšnih pravnih sredstev.
In cases where objections against the EIO are submitted by an interested party in the executing State in respect of the substantive reasons for issuing the EIO, it is advisable that information about such challenge be transmitted to the issuing authority and that the interested party be informed accordingly.
V primerih, ko ugovore zoper EPN predloži zainteresirana stranka v državi izvršiteljici v zvezi z vsebinskimi razlogi za izdajo EPN, se priporoča, da se informacije o takšnem izpodbijanju posredujejo odreditvenemu organu in da se zainteresirano stranko o tem obvesti.
This arrangement complies with the general principle of mutual recognition.
Ti visoki stroški lahko na primer nastanejo zaradi kompleksnih mnenj izvedencev, obsežnih policijskih akcij ali dejavnosti opazovanja v daljšem obdobju.
However, the execution of an EIO may incur exceptionally high costs on the executing State.
Taki stroški ne bi smeli ovirati izvršitve EPN, odreditveni in izvršitveni organi pa bi si morali prizadevati za opredelitev tistih stroškov, ki se štejejo za izjemno visoke.
Such exceptionally high costs may, for example, be complex experts' opinions or extensive police operations or surveillance activities over a long period of time.
Vprašanje stroškov bi lahko postalo predmet posvetovanj med državo izdajateljico in državo izvršiteljico, ki naj to vprašanje poskusita rešiti na posvetovalni ravni.
This should not impede the execution of the EIO and the issuing and executing authorities should seek to establish which costs are to be considered as exceptionally high.
V skrajnem primeru se lahko odreditveni organ odloči, da EPN umakne ali obdrži, del stroškov, ki jih država izvršiteljica oceni kot izjemno visoke in se jim v postopku nikakor ni mogoče izogniti, pa bi morala kriti država izdajateljica.
The issue of costs might become subject to consultations between the issuing State and the executing State and they are recommended to resolve this issue during the consultations stage.
Ta mehanizem ne bi smel biti dodaten razlog za zavrnitev, v nobenem primeru pa ga ne bi smeli izrabiti za zavlačevanje ali preprečitev izvršitve EPN.
As a last resort, the issuing authority may decide to withdraw the EIO or to maintain it, and the part of the costs which are estimated exceptionally high by the executing State and absolutely necessary in the course of the proceedings, should be covered by the issuing State.
EPN vzpostavlja enoten sistem za pridobivanje dokazov.
The given mechanism should not constitute an additional ground for refusal, and in any event should not be abused in a way to delay or impede the execution of the EIO.
Kljub temu pa so potrebna dodatna pravila za nekatere vrste preiskovalnih ukrepov, ki bi jih bilo treba predvideti v EPN, kot so začasna premestitev pridržanih oseb, zaslišanje prek videokonference ali telefonske konference, pridobivanje informacij v zvezi z bančnimi računi ali bančnimi transakcijami, nadzorovanje pošiljk ali tajne preiskave.
The EIO establishes a single regime for obtaining evidence.
V EPN bi morali biti zajeti preiskovalni ukrepi, v okviru katerih se dokazi zbirajo v realnem času, nepretrgano in v določenem časovnem obdobju, vendar bi se morali država izdajateljica in država izvršiteljica po potrebi dogovoriti o praktičnih vidikih, da bi se upoštevale razlike v nacionalnem pravu teh držav.
Additional rules are however necessary for certain types of investigative measures which should be indicated in the EIO, such as the temporary transfer of persons held in custody, hearing by video or telephone conference, obtaining of information related to bank accounts or banking transactions, controlled deliveries or covert investigations.
Ta direktiva določa pravila izvajanja preiskovalnega ukrepa zaradi zbiranja dokazov v vseh fazah kazenskega postopka, vključno s sojenjem, po potrebi s sodelovanjem zadevne osebe.
Investigative measures implying a gathering of evidence in real time, continuously and over a certain period of time should be covered by the EIO, but, where necessary, practical arrangements should be agreed between the issuing State and the executing State in order to accommodate the differences existing in the national laws of those States.
EPN se na primer lahko izda za začasno premestitev zadevne osebe v državo izdajateljico ali izvedbo zaslišanja prek videokonference.
This Directive sets out rules on carrying out, at all stages of criminal proceedings, including the trial phase, of an investigative measure, if needed with the participation of the person concerned with a view to collecting evidence.
Vendar pa bi bilo treba v primeru, ko se ta oseba premesti v drugo državo članico za namene pregona, vključno z njeno privedbo pred sodišče zaradi sojenja, izdati evropski nalog za prijetje v skladu z Okvirnim sklepom Sveta 2002/584/PNZ [9].
For example an EIO may be issued for the temporary transfer of that person to the issuing State or for the carrying out of a hearing by videoconference.
Za zagotovitev sorazmerne uporabe evropskega naloga za prijetje bi moral odreditveni organ preučiti, ali bi bil EPN učinkovit in sorazmeren način za izvedbo kazenskih postopkov.
However, where that person is to be transferred to another Member State for the purposes of prosecution, including bringing that person before a court for the purpose of the standing trial, a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) should be issued in accordance with Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA [9].
Odreditveni organi bi morali zlasti preučiti, ali bi bila lahko izdaja EPN za zaslišanje osumljenca ali obdolženca prek videokonference učinkovita alternativa.
With a view to the proportionate use of an EAW, the issuing authority should consider whether an EIO would be an effective and proportionate means of pursuing criminal proceedings.
EPN se lahko izda za pridobitev dokazov o računih, ne glede na njihovo vrsto, ki jih ima oseba, ki je v kazenskem postopku, v kateri koli banki ali nebančni finančni ustanovi.
The issuing authority should consider, in particular, whether issuing an EIO for the hearing of a suspected or accused person by videoconference could serve as an effective alternative.
To možnost je treba razumeti širše, tako da se ne nanaša samo na osumljence ali obdolžence, temveč tudi na vsako drugo osebo, v zvezi s katero pristojni organi takšne informacije štejejo za potrebne med potekom kazenskih postopkov.
An EIO may be issued in order to obtain evidence concerning the accounts, of whatever nature, held in any bank or any non-banking financial institution by a person subject to criminal proceedings.
Pri sklicevanju na finančne institucije v tej direktivi bi bilo treba ta izraz razumeti v skladu z ustrezno opredelitvijo iz člena 3 Direktive 2005/60/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [10].
This possibility is to be understood broadly as comprising not only suspected or accused persons but also any other person in respect of whom such information is found necessary by the competent authorities in the course of criminal proceedings.
Kadar se EPN izda za pridobitev podrobnosti o določenem računu, bi se moralo razumeti, da med podrobnosti spadajo vsaj ime in naslov imetnika računa, podrobnosti o vseh pooblastilih za račun in vse ostale podrobnosti ali dokumenti, ki jih je predložil imetnik računa ob odprtju računa in jih banka še vedno hrani.
Where in this Directive a reference is made to financial institutions, this term should be understood according to the relevant definition of Article 3 of Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and the Council [10].
Možnosti sodelovanja v okviru te direktive pri prestrezanju telekomunikacij ne bi smele biti omejene na vsebino telekomunikacij, temveč bi lahko zajemale tudi zbiranje podatkov o prometu in lokaciji, povezanih s takšnimi telekomunikacijami, kar bi pristojnim organom omogočilo, da izdajo EPN za pridobitev manj intruzivnih podatkov o telekomunikacijah.
When an EIO is issued to obtain ‘details’ of a specified account, ‘details’ should be understood to include at least the name and address of the account holder, details of any powers of attorney held over the account, and any other details or documents provided by the account holder when the account was opened and that are still held by the bank.
EPN, ki je izdan za pridobitev preteklih podatkov o prometu in lokaciji, povezanih s telekomunikacijami, bi moral biti obravnavan v skladu s splošno ureditvijo v zvezi z izvrševanjem EPN in se lahko glede na nacionalno pravo države izvršiteljice šteje za omejitveni preiskovalni ukrep.
Possibilities to cooperate under this Directive on the interception of telecommunications should not be limited to the content of the telecommunications, but could also cover collection of traffic and location data associated with such telecommunications, allowing competent authorities to issue an EIO for the purpose of obtaining less intrusive data on telecommunications.
Kadar lahko potrebno tehnično pomoč zagotovi več držav članic, bi bilo treba EPN poslati samo eni od njih, prednost pa bi bilo treba dati državi članici, v kateri se zadevna oseba nahaja.
An EIO issued to obtain historical traffic and location data related to telecommunications should be dealt with under the general regime related to the execution of the EIO and may be considered, depending on the national law of the executing State, as a coercive investigative measure.
Država članica, v kateri se oseba, katere telekomunikacije se prestrezajo, nahaja, in katere tehnična pomoč za izvedbo prestrezanja ni potrebna, bi morala biti o tem uradno obveščena v skladu s to direktivo.
Where several Member States are in a position to provide the necessary technical assistance, an EIO should be sent only to one of them and priority should be given to the Member State where the person concerned is located.
Vendar pa se EPN lahko pošlje več kot eni državi izvršiteljici, kadar tehnične pomoči ne more zagotoviti samo ena država članica.
Member States where the subject of the interception is located and from which no technical assistance is needed to carry out the interception should be notified thereof in accordance with this Directive.
Odreditveni organ bi moral v EPN, ki vsebuje zahtevo za prestrezanje telekomunikacij, izvršitvenemu organu zagotoviti zadostne informacije, kot so podrobnosti o kaznivem ravnanju, ki se preiskuje, da bi se izvršitvenemu organu omogočilo presojo, ali bi bil zadevni preiskovalni ukrep odobren v podobnem notranjem primeru.
However, where the technical assistance may not be received from merely one Member State, an EIO may be transmitted to more than one executing State.
Države članice bi morale upoštevati, da je zaradi lažjega sodelovanja v okviru tega instrumenta v zvezi z zakonitim prestrezanjem telekomunikacij pomembno zagotoviti, da lahko tehnično pomoč zagotovi ponudnik storitev, ki upravlja javno dostopna telekomunikacijska omrežja in storitve na ozemlju zadevne države članice.
In an EIO containing the request for interception of telecommunications the issuing authority should provide the executing authority with sufficient information, such as details of the criminal conduct under investigation, in order to allow the executing authority to assess whether that investigative measure, would be authorised in a similar domestic case.
V tej direktivi so zaradi njenega področja uporabe začasni ukrepi zajeti le za zbiranje dokazov.
Member States should have regard to the importance of ensuring that technical assistance can be provided by a service provider operating publicly available telecommunications networks and services in the territory of the Member State concerned, in order to facilitate cooperation under this instrument in relation to the lawful interception of telecommunications.
V zvezi s tem bi bilo treba poudariti, da se lahko med kazenskim postopkom uporabijo različni začasni ukrepi za vsak predmet, tudi za finančna sredstva, ne le za zbiranje dokazov, ampak tudi za zaplembo.
This Directive, by virtue of its scope, deals with provisional measures only with a view to gathering evidence.
Razlika med tema dvema ciljema začasnih ukrepov ni vedno očitna in cilj začasnega ukrepa se lahko med postopkom spremeni.
In this respect, it should be underlined that any item, including financial assets, may be subject to various provisional measures in the course of criminal proceedings, not only with a view to gathering evidence but also with a view to confiscation.
Zato je ključno, da se v prihodnje ohrani nemotena povezanost različnih instrumentov, ki se uporabljajo na tem področju.
The distinction between the two objectives of provisional measures is not always obvious and the objective of the provisional measure may change in the course of the proceedings.
Iz istega razloga bi morala biti tudi presoja, ali se bo predmet uporabil kot dokaz in bo zato zanj veljal EPN, prepuščena odreditvenemu organu.
For this reason, it is crucial to maintain a smooth relationship between the various instruments applicable in this field.
Kadar se v relevantnih mednarodnih instrumentih, kot so konvencije, sklenjene v okviru Sveta Evrope, sklicuje na medsebojno pomoč, bi se moralo razumeti, da ima ta direktiva med državami članicami, v katerih je ta direktiva zavezujoča, prednost pred zadevnimi konvencijami.
Furthermore, for the same reason, the assessment of whether the item is to be used as evidence and therefore be the object of an EIO should be left to the issuing authority.
Kategorije kaznivih dejanj iz Priloge D bi se morale razlagati v skladu z njihovo razlago v okviru že obstoječih pravnih instrumentov o vzajemnem priznavanju.
Where reference is made to mutual assistance in relevant international instruments, such as in conventions concluded within the Council of Europe, it should be understood that between the Member States bound by this Directive it takes precedence over those conventions.
V skladu s Skupno politično izjavo z dne 28. septembra 2011 držav članic in Komisije o obrazložitvenih dokumentih [11] se države članice zavezujejo, da bodo v upravičenih primerih obvestilu o ukrepih za prenos priložile en ali več dokumentov, v katerih se pojasni razmerje med sestavnimi elementi direktive in ustrezajočimi deli nacionalnih instrumentov za prenos.
The categories of offences listed in Annex D should be interpreted consistently with their interpretation under existing legal instruments on mutual recognition.
Evropski parlament in Svet menita, da je posredovanje takih dokumentov v primeru te direktive upravičeno.
In accordance with the Joint Political Declaration of 28 September 2011 of Member States and the Commission on explanatory documents [11], Member States have undertaken to accompany, in justified cases, the notification of their transposition measures with one or more documents explaining the relationship between the components of a directive and the corresponding parts of national transposition instruments.
Ker cilja te direktive, in sicer vzajemnega priznavanja sklepov o pridobitvi dokazov, države članice ne morejo zadovoljivo doseči, temveč se ta cilj zaradi obsega in učinkov predlaganega ukrepa lažje doseže na ravni Unije, lahko Unija sprejme ukrepe v skladu z načelom subsidiarnosti iz člena 5 PEU.
With regard to this Directive, the European Parliament and the Council consider the transmission of such documents to be justified.
V skladu z načelom sorazmernosti iz navedenega člena ta direktiva ne presega tistega, kar je potrebno za doseganje navedenega cilja.
Since the objective of this Directive, namely the mutual recognition of decisions taken to obtain evidence, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of its scale and effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the TEU.
V tej direktivi so spoštovane temeljne pravice in upoštevana načela, ki jih priznavajo člen 6 PEU in Listina, zlasti v njenem naslovu VI, mednarodno pravo in mednarodni sporazumi, katerih pogodbenice so Unija ali vse države članice, vključno z Evropsko konvencijo o varstvu človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin, ter ustave držav članic na njihovih zadevnih področjih uporabe.
In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.
Ničesar v tej direktivi ni mogoče razlagati kot prepoved zavrnitve izvršitve EPN, kadar zaradi objektivnih elementov obstajajo razlogi za sum, da je bil EPN izdan z namenom pregona ali kaznovanja osebe na podlagi njenega spola, rase ali narodnosti, vere, spolne usmerjenosti, državljanstva, jezika ali političnega prepričanja ali da bo oseba zaradi katerega od teh razlogov v slabšem položaju.
This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by Article 6 of the TEU and in the Charter, notably Title VI thereof, by international law and international agreements to which the Union or all the Member States are party, including the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and in Member States' constitutions in their respective fields of application.
Varstvo fizičnih oseb pri obdelavi osebnih podatkov je temeljna pravica.
Nothing in this Directive may be interpreted as prohibiting refusal to execute an EIO when there are reasons to believe, on the basis of objective elements, that the EIO has been issued for the purpose of prosecuting or punishing a person on account of his or her sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion, sexual orientation, nationality, language or political opinions, or that the person's position may be prejudiced for any of these reasons.
V skladu s členom 8(1) Listine in členom 16(1) PDEU ima vsakdo pravico do varstva osebnih podatkov, ki se nanašajo nanj.
The protection of natural persons in relation to the processing of personal data is a fundamental right.
Države članice bi morale pri uporabi te direktive zagotoviti pregledne politike v zvezi z obdelavo osebnih podatkov in uveljavljanje pravic posameznika do pravnih sredstev za varstvo njegovih osebnih podatkov.
In accordance with Article 8(1) of the Charter and Article 16(1) of the TFEU, everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning them.
Osebni podatki, pridobljeni na podlagi te direktive, bi morali biti obdelani, le če je to nujno, in bi morali biti sorazmerni glede na namene, ki so združljivi s preprečevanjem, preiskovanjem, odkrivanjem in pregonom kaznivih dejanj ali izvrševanjem kazenskih sankcij ter izvajanjem pravice do obrambe.
Member States should, in the application of this Directive, provide for transparent policies with regard to the processing of personal data and for the exercise of the rights of data subjects to legal remedies for the protection of their personal data.
Dostop do informacij, ki vsebujejo osebne podatke, bi morale imeti le pooblaščene osebe, kar se lahko doseže s postopki preverjanja.
Personal data obtained under this Directive should only be processed when necessary and should be proportionate to the purposes compatible with the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of crime or enforcement of criminal sanctions and the exercise of the rights of defence.
V skladu s členom 3 Protokola (št. 21) o stališču Združenega kraljestva in Irske glede območja svobode, varnosti in pravice, ki je priložen PEU in PDEU, je Združeno kraljestvo uradno izrazilo željo, da sodeluje pri sprejetju in uporabi te direktive.
Only authorised persons should have access to information containing personal data which may be obtained through authentication processes.
V skladu s členom 1, 2 in 4a(1) Protokola (št. 21) o stališču Združenega kraljestva in Irske glede območja svobode, varnosti in pravice, ki je priložen PEU in PDEU, in brez poseganja v člen 4 navedenega protokola Irska ne sodeluje pri sprejetju te direktive, ki zato zanjo ni zavezujoča in se v njej ne uporablja.
In accordance with Article 3 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of Freedom, Security and Justice annexed to the TEU and the TFEU, the United Kingdom has notified its wish to take part in the adoption and application of this Directive.
V skladu s členoma 1 in 2 Protokola (št. 22) o stališču Danske, ki je priložen PEU in PDEU, Danska ne sodeluje pri sprejetju te direktive, ki zato zanjo ni zavezujoča in se v njej ne uporablja.
In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 and Article 4a(1) of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of Freedom, Security and Justice annexed to the TEU and the TFEU, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, Ireland is not taking part in the adoption of this Directive and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
Evropski nadzornik za varstvo podatkov je 5. oktobra 2010 [12] podal mnenje na podlagi člena 41(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 45/2001 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [13] –
In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the Position of Denmark annexed to the TEU and the TFEU, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Directive and is not bound by it or subject to its application.
SPREJELA NASLEDNJO DIREKTIVO:
The European Data Protection Supervisor delivered an opinion on 5 October 2010 [12], based on Article 41(2) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council [13],
POGLAVJE I
HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
EVROPSKI PREISKOVALNI NALOG
THE EUROPEAN INVESTIGATION ORDER
Evropski preiskovalni nalog in obveznost njegove izvršitve
The European Investigation Order and obligation to execute it
Evropski preiskovalni nalog (EPN) je sodna odločba, ki jo izda ali potrdi pravosodni organ države članice (v nadaljnjem besedilu: država izdajateljica) zaradi izvedbe enega ali več posebnih preiskovalnih ukrepov v drugi državi članici (v nadaljnjem besedilu: država izvršiteljica) z namenom pridobitve dokazov v skladu s to direktivo.
A European Investigation Order (EIO) is a judicial decision which has been issued or validated by a judicial authority of a Member State (‘OGthe issuing State’) to have one or several specific investigative measure(s) carried out in another Member State (‘the executing State’) to obtain evidence in accordance with this Directive.
EPN se lahko izda tudi za pridobitev dokazov, ki jih pristojni organi države izvršiteljice že imajo.
The EIO may also be issued for obtaining evidence that is already in the possession of the competent authorities of the executing State.
Države članice izvršijo EPN na podlagi načela vzajemnega priznavanja in v skladu s to direktivo.
Member States shall execute an EIO on the basis of the principle of mutual recognition and in accordance with this Directive.
Za izdajo EPN lahko v okviru veljavnih pravic do obrambe v skladu z nacionalnim kazenskim postopkom zaprosi osumljenec ali obdolženec ali odvetnik, ki nastopa v imenu osumljenca ali obdolženca.
The issuing of an EIO may be requested by a suspected or accused person, or by a lawyer on his behalf, within the framework of applicable defence rights in conformity with national criminal procedure.
Ta direktiva ne spreminja obveznosti spoštovanja temeljnih pravic in pravnih načel, določenih v členu 6 PEU, vključno s pravico do obrambe oseb v kazenskem postopku, nespremenjene pa ostanejo tudi kakršne koli tozadevne obveznosti pravosodnih organov.