natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the few specifically established and exceptional cases where the warrant requirement does not apply [181], law enforcement is subject to a ‘reasonableness’ test [182].
Za učinkovito spremljanje delovanja zasebnostnega ščita bi morale države članice obveščati Komisija o pomembnih ukrepih organov za varstvo podatkov.
Whether a search or seizure is reasonable is ‘determined by assessing, on the one hand, the degree to which it intrudes upon an individual's privacy and, on the other, the degree to which it is needed for the promotion of legitimate governmental interests’ [183].
Sodišče je tudi menilo, da morajo države članice in njihovi organi v skladu z drugim pododstavkom člena 25(6) Direktive 95/46/ES sprejeti ukrepe, ki so potrebni za skladnost z ukrepi institucij Unije, saj se za slednje načeloma šteje, da so zakoniti in da ustvarjajo pravne učinke, dokler niso ukinjeni, razveljavljeni v tožbi za razveljavitev ali razglašeni za neveljavne na podlagi predloga za sprejetje predhodne odločbe ali ugovora nezakonitosti.
More generally, the Fourth Amendment guarantees privacy, dignity, and protects against arbitrary and invasive acts by officers of the Government [184].
Zato je sklep Komisije o ustreznosti varstva, sprejet na podlagi člena 25(6) Direktive 95/46/ES, zavezujoč za vse organe držav članic, na katere je naslovljen, vključno z neodvisnimi nadzornimi organi teh držav članic [204].
These concepts capture the idea of necessity and proportionality in Union law.
Če tak organ prejme pritožbo, ki zbuja dvom o skladnosti sklepa Komisije o ustreznosti varstva z varstvom temeljne pravice do zasebnosti in varstva podatkov, ter meni, da so predloženi ugovori dobro utemeljeni, mu mora nacionalna zakonodaja zagotavljati pravno sredstvo za predložitev teh ugovorov nacionalnemu sodišču, ki mora v primeru dvomov prekiniti postopek in Sodišču predložiti predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe [205].
Once law enforcement no longer has a need to use the seized items as evidence, they should be returned [185].
REDNO PREVERJANJE UGOTOVITVE O USTREZNOSTI
While the Fourth Amendment right does not extend to non-U.S. persons that are not resident in the United States, the latter nevertheless benefit indirectly from its protections, given that the personal data are held by U.S. companies with the effect that law enforcement authorities in any event have to seek judicial authorisation (or at least respect the reasonableness requirement) [186].
Ob upoštevanju dejstva, da se lahko stopnja varstva, ki jo zagotavlja pravni red ZDA, spreminja, bo Komisija po sprejetju tega sklepa redno preverjala, ali so ugotovitve v zvezi z ustreznostjo ravni varstva, ki jo zagotavljajo Združene države Amerike v okviru zasebnostnega ščita EU-ZDA, še vedno dejansko in pravno utemeljene.
Further protections are provided by special statutory authorities, as well as the Department of Justice Guidelines, which limit law enforcement access to data on grounds equivalent to necessity and proportionality (e.g. by requiring that the FBI use the least intrusive investigative methods feasible, taking into account the effect on privacy and civil liberties) [187].
Tako preverjanje se v vsakem primeru zahteva, kadar Komisija pridobi kakršne koli informacije, ki zbujajo dvom v zvezi s tem [206].
According to the representations made by the U.S. government, the same or higher protections apply to law enforcement investigations at State level (with respect to investigations carried out under State laws) [188].
Zato bo Komisija stalno spremljala splošni okvir za prenos osebnih podatkov, ustvarjenih v okviru zasebnostnega ščita EU-ZDA, ter upoštevanje zagotovil in zavez, vsebovanih v dokumentih, ki so priloženi temu sklepu, s strani organov ZDA.
Although a prior judicial authorisation by a court or grand jury (an investigate arm of the court impanelled by a judge or magistrate) is not required in all cases [189], administrative subpoenas are limited to specific cases and will be subject to independent judicial review at least where the government seeks enforcement in court [190].
Za olajšanje tega procesa so se ZDA zavezale, da bodo Komisijo obveščale o pomembnih spremembah prava ZDA, če so pomembne za zasebnostni ščit na področju varstva podatkov ter omejitev in zaščitnih ukrepov, ki se uporabljajo za dostop javnih organov do osebnih podatkov.
The same applies for the use of administrative subpoenas for public interest purposes.
Poleg tega bo ta sklep predmet skupnega letnega pregleda, ki bo zajemal vse vidike delovanja zasebnostnega ščita EU-ZDA, vključno z uporabo izjem glede nacionalne varnosti in kazenskega pregona pri načelih.
In addition, according to the representations from the U.S. government, similar substantive limitations apply in that agencies may only seek access to data that is relevant to matters falling with their scope of authority and have to respect the standard of reasonableness.
Ker lahko na ugotovitev o ustreznosti vplivajo tudi pravne spremembe prava Unije, bo Komisija ocenila raven varstva, ki ga zagotavlja zasebnostni ščit po začetku uporabe Uredbe (EU) 2016/679 o splošnem varstvu podatkov.
Moreover, U.S. law provides for a number of judicial redress avenues for individuals, against a public authority or one of its officials, where these authorities process personal data.
Za izvedbo skupnega letnega pregleda iz prilog I, II in VI se bo Komisija sestala z Ministrstvom za trgovino in FTC, po potrebi pa tudi z drugimi ministrstvi in agencijami, vključenimi v izvajanje ureditev zasebnostnega ščita, ter, glede zadev, ki se nanašajo na nacionalno varnost, s predstavniki ODNI, drugimi organi obveščevalne skupnosti in varuhom človekovih pravic.
These avenues, which include in particular the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), are open to all individuals irrespective of their nationality, subject to any applicable conditions.
Tega sestanka se bodo lahko udeležili organi za varstvo podatkov iz EU in predstavniki delovne skupine iz člena 29.
Generally, under the judicial review provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act [191], ‘any person suffering legal wrong because of agency action, or adversely affected or aggrieved by agency action’, is entitled to seek judicial review [192].
Komisija bo v okviru skupnega letnega pregleda zahtevala, da Ministrstvo za trgovino zagotovi izčrpne informacije o vseh ustreznih vidikih delovanja zasebnostnega ščita EU-ZDA, vključno z zadevami, ki jih Ministrstvo za trgovino prejme od organov za varstvo podatkov, in rezultati pregledov skladnosti po uradni dolžnosti.
This includes the possibility to ask the court to ‘hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be […] arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law’ [193].
Komisija bo zahtevala tudi pojasnila v zvezi s kakršnimi koli vprašanji ali zadevami v zvezi z zasebnostnim ščitom EU-ZDA in njegovim delovanjem, ki izhajajo iz kakršnih koli razpoložljivih informacij, vključno s poročili o preglednosti, dovoljenimi na podlagi zakona ZDA o svobodi, javnimi poročili nacionalnih obveščevalnih organov ZDA, organov za varstvo podatkov in skupin za zasebnost, medijskimi poročili ali kakršnimi koli drugim možnim virom.
More specifically, Title II of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act [194] sets forth a system of statutory privacy rights and as such governs law enforcement access to the contents of wire, oral or electronic communications stored by third-party service providers [195].
Poleg tega bi morale države članice za olajšanje naloge Komisije v zvezi s tem obveščati Komisijo o primerih, v katerih ukrepi organov, pristojnih za zagotavljanje skladnosti z načeli v ZDA, ne zagotavljajo skladnosti, in o kakršnih koli znakih, da ukrepi javnih organov ZDA, pristojnih za nacionalno varnost ali preprečevanje, preiskovanje, odkrivanje ali pregon kaznivih dejanj, ne zagotavljajo zahtevane ravni varstva.
It criminalises the unlawful (i.e. not authorised by court or otherwise permissible) access to such communications and provides recourse for an affected individual to file a civil action in U.S. federal court for actual and punitive damages as well as equitable or declaratory relief against a government official that has wilfully committed such unlawful acts, or against the United States.
Komisija bo na podlagi skupnega letnega pregleda pripravila javno poročilo, ki ga bo predložila Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu.
Also, under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552), any person has the right to obtain access to federal agency records and, upon exhaustion of administrative remedies, to enforce such right in court, except to the extent that such records are protected from public disclosure by an exemption or special law enforcement exclusion [196].
ZADRŽANJE IZVAJANJA SKLEPA O USTREZNOSTI VARSTVA
In addition, several other statutes afford individuals the right to bring suit against a U.S. public authority or official with respect to the processing of their personal data, such as the Wiretap Act [197], the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act [198], the Federal Torts Claim Act [199], the Right to Financial Privacy Act [200], and the Fair Credit Reporting Act [201].
Če Komisija na podlagi pregledov ali kakršnih koli drugih razpoložljivih informacij ugotovi, da se raven varstva, ki ga zagotavlja zasebnostni ščit, ne more več šteti za v bistvenem enako ravni varstva v Uniji ali da obstajajo jasni znaki, da dejanska skladnost z načeli v ZDA morda ni več zagotovljena ali da ukrepi javnih organov ZDA, pristojnih za nacionalno varnost ali preprečevanje, preiskovanje, odkrivanje ali pregon kaznivih dejanj, ne zagotavljajo zahtevane ravni varstva, o tem obvesti Ministrstvo za trgovino in zahteva, da se sprejmejo ustrezni ukrepi za hitro odpravo morebitne neskladnosti z načeli v določenem, razumnem roku.
The Commission therefore concludes that there are rules in place in the United States designed to limit any interference for law enforcement [202] or other public interest purposes with the fundamental rights of the persons whose personal data are transferred from the Union to the United States under the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield to what is strictly necessary to achieve the legitimate objective in question, and that ensure effective legal protection against such interference.
Če organi ZDA po izteku določenega roka ne dokažejo zadovoljivo, da zasebnostni ščit EU-ZDA še naprej zagotavlja dejansko skladnost in ustrezno raven varstva, Komisija začne postopek, ki vodi do delnega ali popolnega zadržanja izvajanja ali razveljavitve tega sklepa [207].
ADEQUATE LEVEL OF PROTECTION UNDER THE EU-U.S. PRIVACY SHIELD
Druga možnost je, da Komisija predlaga spremembo tega sklepa, na primer z omejitvijo obsega ugotovitve o ustreznosti varstva samo na prenose podatkov, za katere veljajo posebni pogoji.
In the light of the those findings, the Commission considers that the United States ensures an adequate level of protection for personal data transferred from the Union to self-certified organisations in the United States under the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield.
Komisija bo začela postopek za zadržanje izvajanja ali razveljavitev zlasti v primeru:
In particular, the Commission considers that the Principles issued by the U.S. Department of Commerce as a whole ensure a level of protection of personal data that is essentially equivalent to the one guaranteed by the basic principles laid down in Directive 95/46/EC.
znakov, da organi ZDA ne izpolnjujejo zagotovil in zavez iz dokumentov, priloženih temu sklepu, vključno v zvezi s pogoji in omejitvami za dostop javnih organov ZDA za kazenski pregon, nacionalno varnost in druge namene javnega interesa do osebnih podatkov, ki se prenašajo v okviru zasebnostnega ščita;
In addition, the effective application of the Principles is guaranteed by the transparency obligations and the administration of the Privacy Shield by the Department of Commerce.
neučinkovitega obravnavanja pritožb posameznikov iz EU, na katere se nanašajo osebni podatki, Komisija pa bo v zvezi s tem upoštevala okoliščine, ki vplivajo na možnost uveljavljanja pravic posameznikov, na katere se nanašajo osebni podatki, vključno s prostovoljno zavezo samocertificiranih podjetij iz ZDA, da bodo sodelovala z organi za varstvo podatkov in upoštevala njihove nasvete, ali
Moreover, the Commission considers that, taken as a whole, the oversight and recourse mechanisms provided for by the Privacy Shield enable infringements of the Principles by Privacy Shield organisations to be identified and punished in practice and offer legal remedies to the data subject to gain access to personal data relating to him and, eventually, to obtain the rectification or erasure of such data.
nepravočasnih in neustreznih odgovorov varuha človekovih pravic na področju zasebnostnega ščita na zahtevke posameznikov, na katere se nanašajo osebni podatki.
Finally, on the basis of the available information about the U.S. legal order, including the representations and commitments from the U.S. government, the Commission considers that any interference by U.S. public authorities with the fundamental rights of the persons whose data are transferred from the Union to the United States under the Privacy Shield for national security, law enforcement or other public interest purposes, and the ensuing restrictions imposed on self-certified organisations with respect to their adherence to the Principles, will be limited to what is strictly necessary to achieve the legitimate objective in question, and that there exists effective legal protection against such interference.
Komisija bo razmislila tudi o začetku postopka za spremembo, odložitev izvajanja ali razveljavitev tega sklepa, če Ministrstvo za trgovino ali druga ministrstva ali agencije, vključeni v izvajanje zasebnostnega ščita, ali, za zadeve v zvezi z nacionalno varnostjo, predstavniki obveščevalne skupnosti ZDA ali varuh človekovih pravic v okviru skupnega letnega pregleda delovanja zasebnostnega ščita EU-ZDA ali kako drugače ne bodo zagotovili informacij ali pojasnil, potrebnih za oceno skladnosti z načeli, učinkovitost postopkov obravnavanja pritožb ali kakršno koli znižanje zahtevane ravni varstva zaradi ukrepov nacionalnih obveščevalnih organov ZDA, zlasti kot posledica zbiranja in/ali dostopanja do osebnih podatkov, ki ni omejeno na tisto, kar je nujno potrebno in sorazmerno.
The Commission concludes that this meets the standards of Article 25 of Directive 95/46/EC, interpreted in light of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as explained by the Court of Justice in particular in the Schrems judgment.
V zvezi s tem bo Komisija upoštevala obseg ustreznih informacij, ki se lahko pridobijo iz drugih virov, vključno s poročili samocertificiranih podjetij iz ZDA, kot je dovoljeno na podlagi zakona ZDA o svobodi.
ACTION OF DATA PROTECTION AUTHORITIES AND INFORMATION TO THE COMMISSION
Delovna skupina za varstvo posameznikov glede obdelave osebnih podatkov, ustanovljena v skladu s členom 29 Direktive 95/46/ES, je izdala mnenje o ravni varstva, ki ga zagotavlja zasebnostni ščit EU-ZDA [208], ki se je upoštevalo pri pripravi tega sklepa.
In the Schrems judgment, the Court of Justice clarified that the Commission has no competence to restrict the powers that DPAs derive from Article 28 of Directive 95/46/EC (including the power to suspend data transfers) where a person, in bringing a claim under that provision, calls into question the compatibility of a Commission adequacy decision with the protection of the fundamental right to privacy and data protection [203].
Evropski parlament je sprejel resolucijo o čezatlantskem pretoku podatkov [209].
In order to effectively monitor the functioning of the Privacy Shield, the Commission should be informed by Member States about relevant action undertaken by DPAs.
Ukrepi, določeni s tem sklepom, so v skladu z mnenjem odbora, ustanovljenega na podlagi člena 31(1) Direktive 95/46/ES –
The Court of Justice furthermore considered that, in line with the second subparagraph of Article 25(6) of Directive 95/46/EC, Member States and their organs must take the measures necessary to comply with acts of the Union institutions, as the latter are in principle presumed to be lawful and accordingly produce legal effects until such time as they are withdrawn, annulled in an action for annulment or declared invalid following a reference for a preliminary ruling or a plea of illegality.
SPREJELA NASLEDNJI SKLEP:
Consequently, a Commission adequacy decision adopted pursuant to Article 25(6) of Directive 95/46/EC is binding on all organs of the Member States to which it is addressed, including their independent supervisory authorities [204].
Člen 1
Where such an authority has received a complaint putting in question the compliance of a Commission adequacy decision with the protection of the fundamental right to privacy and data protection and considers the objections advanced to be well founded, national law must provide it with a legal remedy to put those objections before a national court which, in case of doubts, must stay proceedings and make a reference for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice [205].
Za namene člena 25(2) Direktive 95/46/ES ZDA zagotavljajo ustrezno raven varstva osebnih podatkov, ki se v okviru zasebnostnega ščita EU-ZDA prenašajo iz Unije organizacijam v ZDA.
PERIODIC REVIEW OF ADEQUACY FINDING
Zasebnostni ščit EU-ZDA sestavljajo načela, ki jih je 7. julija 2016 izdalo Ministrstvo za trgovino ZDA, kakor so navedena v Prilogi II, ter uradna zagotovila in zaveze iz dokumentov, navedenih v prilogah I in III–VII.
In the light of the fact that the level of protection afforded by the U.S. legal order may be liable to change, the Commission, following adoption of this decision, will check periodically whether the findings relating to the adequacy of the level of protection ensured by the United States under the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield are still factually and legally justified.
Za namene odstavka 1 se osebni podatki prenašajo v okviru zasebnostnega ščita EU-ZDA, kadar se prenašajo iz Unije organizacijam v ZDA, ki so vključene na „seznam zasebnostnega ščita“, ki ga vodi in objavlja Ministrstvo za trgovino ZDA, v skladu s členoma I in III načel iz Priloge II.
Such a check is required, in any event, when the Commission acquires any information giving rise to a justified doubt in that regard [206].
Člen 2
Therefore, the Commission will continuously monitor the overall framework for the transfer of personal data created by the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield as well as compliance by U.S. authorities with the representations and commitments contained in the documents attached to this decision.
Ta sklep ne vpliva na uporabo določb Direktive 95/46/ES, razen člena 25(1), ki se nanašajo na obdelavo osebnih podatkov v državah članicah, zlasti ne na določbe člena 4 Direktive.
To facilitate this process, the U.S. has committed to inform the Commission of material developments in U.S. law when relevant to the Privacy Shield in the field of data protection and the limitations and safeguards applicable to access to personal data by public authorities.
Člen 3
Moreover, this decision will be subject to an Annual Joint Review which will cover all aspects of the functioning of the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield, including the operation of the national security and law enforcement exceptions to the Principles.
Kadar pristojni organi v državah članicah izvajajo svoja pooblastila v skladu s členom 28(3) Direktive 95/46/ES za zadržanje izvajanja ali dokončno prepoved pritoka podatkov v organizacijo v ZDA, ki je vključena na seznam zasebnostnega ščita v skladu s členoma I in III načel iz Priloge II, da bi zaščitili posameznike pri obdelavi njihovih osebnih podatkov, zadevna država članica o tem nemudoma obvesti Komisijo.
In addition, since the adequacy finding may also be influenced by legal developments in Union law, the Commission will assess the level of protection provided by the Privacy Shield following the entry into application of the GDPR.
Člen 4
To perform the Annual Joint Review referred to in Annexes I, II and VI, the Commission will meet with the Department of Commerce and FTC, accompanied, if appropriate, by other departments and agencies involved in the implementation of the Privacy Shield arrangements, as well as, for matters pertaining to national security, representatives of the ODNI, other Intelligence Community elements and the Ombudsperson.
Komisija bo stalno spremljala delovanje zasebnostnega ščita EU-ZDA, da bi ocenila, ali ZDA še naprej zagotavljajo ustrezno raven varstva osebnih podatkov, ki se v okviru ščita prenašajo iz Unije v ZDA.
The participation in this meeting will be open for EU DPAs and representatives of the Article 29 Working Party.
Države članice in Komisija se medsebojno obveščajo o primerih, v katerih se zdi, da vladni organi v ZDA z zakonskimi pooblastili za uveljavljanje skladnosti z načeli iz Priloge II ne zagotavljajo učinkovitih mehanizmov odkrivanja in nadzora, ki bi v praksi omogočali ugotavljanje in sankcioniranje kršitev načel.
In the framework of the Annual Joint Review, the Commission will request that the Department of Commerce provides comprehensive information on all relevant aspects of the functioning of the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield, including referrals received by the Department of Commerce from DPAs and the results of ex officio compliance reviews.
Države članice in Komisija se medsebojno obveščajo o kakršnih koli znakih, da posegi javnih organov ZDA, pristojnih za nacionalno varnost, kazenski pregon ali druge javne interese, v pravico posameznikov do varstva osebnih podatkov presegajo tisto, kar je nujno potrebno, in/ali da ni učinkovitega pravnega varstva pred takimi posegi.
The Commission will also seek explanations concerning any questions or matters concerning the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield and its operation arising from any information available, including transparency reports allowed under the USA FREEDOM Act, public reports by U.S. national intelligence authorities, the DPAs, privacy groups, media reports, or any other possible source.
Komisija bo v enem letu od uradnega obvestila o tem sklepu državam članicam in nato enkrat letno proučila ugotovitev iz člena 1(1) na podlagi vseh razpoložljivih informacij, vključno z informacijami, prejetimi v okviru skupnega letnega pregleda iz prilog I in II–VI.
Moreover, in order to facilitate the Commission's task in this regard, the Member States should inform the Commission of cases where the actions of bodies responsible for ensuring compliance with the Principles in the United States fail to secure compliance and of any indications that the actions of U.S. public authorities responsible for national security or the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offenses do not ensure the required level of protection.
Komisija bo o kakršnih koli zadevnih ugotovitvah poročala odboru, ustanovljenemu v skladu s členom 31 Direktive 95/46/ES.
On the basis of the annual joint review, the Commission will prepare a public report to be submitted to the European Parliament and the Council.
Komisija bo predložila osnutek ukrepov, v skladu s postopkom iz člena 31(2) Direktive 95/46/ES, za zadržanje izvajanja, spremembo, razveljavitev ali omejitev področja uporabe tega sklepa,med drugim kadar obstajajo znaki:
SUSPENSION OF THE ADEQUACY DECISION
sistematičnega nezagotavljanja pravočasnih in ustreznih odgovorov varuha človekovih pravic na področju zasebnostnega ščita na zahtevke posameznikov iz EU, na katere se nanašajo osebni podatki, v skladu s členom 4(e) Priloge III.