natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The competent authorities should take information deriving from an individual assessment into account when determining whether any specific measure concerning the child is to be taken, such as providing any practical assistance; when assessing the appropriateness and effectiveness of any precautionary measures in respect of the child, such as decisions on provisional detention or alternative measures; and, taking account of the individual characteristics and circumstances of the child, when taking any decision or course of action in the context of the criminal proceedings, including when sentencing.
Ko je individualna ocena na voljo, bi se lahko ponovno preučili primernost in učinkovitost ukrepov ali odločitev, sprejetih pred izvedbo individualne ocene.
Where an individual assessment is not yet available, this should not prevent the competent authorities from taking such measures or decisions, provided that the conditions set out in this Directive are complied with, including carrying out an individual assessment at the earliest appropriate stage of the proceedings.
Individualno oceno bi bilo treba opraviti v najzgodnejši ustrezni fazi postopka in pravočasno, tako da lahko tožilec, sodnik ali drug pristojni organ pred predložitvijo obtožnega akta za namene sojenja upošteva informacije iz te ocene.
The appropriateness and effectiveness of the measures or decisions that are taken before an individual assessment is carried out could be re-assessed when the individual assessment becomes available.
Ne glede na to bi moralo biti mogoče, da se obtožni akt lahko predloži tudi v primeru, da individualna ocena ni na voljo, pod pogojem, da je to v korist otroka.
The individual assessment should take place at the earliest appropriate stage of the proceedings and in due time so that the information deriving from it can be taken into account by the prosecutor, judge or another competent authority, before presentation of the indictment for the purposes of the trial.
To bi bilo mogoče v primeru, ko je denimo otrok v pridržanju pred zaključkom sojenja in bi čakanje na individualno oceno utegnilo pomeniti nepotrebno podaljšanje pridržanja.
It should nevertheless be possible to present an indictment in the absence of an individual assessment provided that this is in the child's best interests.
Države članice bi morale imeti možnost odstopanja od obveznosti, da opravijo individualno oceno, kadar takšno odstopanje upravičujejo okoliščine zadeve, med drugim ob upoštevanju teže domnevnega kaznivega dejanja in ukrepov, ki se lahko sprejmejo, če je otrok spoznan za krivega takšnega kaznivega dejanja, pod pogojem, da je odstopanje skladno s koristjo otroka.
This could be the case, for example, where a child is in pre-trial detention and waiting for the individual assessment to become available would risk unnecessarily prolonging such detention.
V tem okviru bi bilo treba upoštevati vse ustrezne dejavnike, tudi to, ali je bil otrok nedavno že predmet individualne ocene v okviru kazenskega postopka in ali gre za zadevo, ki jo je mogoče obravnavati brez obtožnega akta.
Member States should be able to derogate from the obligation to carry out an individual assessment where such a derogation is warranted in the circumstances of the case, taking into account, inter alia, the seriousness of the alleged criminal offence and the measures that could be taken if the child is found guilty of such an offence, provided that the derogation is compatible with the child's best interests.
Dolžnost skrbeti za otroke, ki so osumljene ali obdolžene osebe, je temelj poštenega izvajanja sodne oblasti, zlasti kadar je otrokom odvzeta prostost in so zaradi tega v še posebej šibkem položaju.
In that context, all relevant elements should be taken into consideration, including whether or not the child has, in the recent past, been the subject of an individual assessment in the context of criminal proceedings or whether the case concerned may be conducted without an indictment.
Da bi zagotovili osebno celovitost otroka, ki mu je odvzeta prostost, bi moral imeti otrok pravico do zdravniškega pregleda.
The duty of care towards children who are suspects or accused persons underpins a fair administration of justice, in particular where children are deprived of liberty and are therefore in a particularly weak position.
Tak zdravniški pregled bi moral opraviti zdravnik ali drug usposobljen strokovnjak, in sicer na pobudo pristojnih organov, zlasti ko določene zdravstvene indikacije upravičujejo tak pregled, ali na zahtevo otroka ali nosilca starševske odgovornosti ali otrokovega odvetnika.
In order to ensure the personal integrity of a child who is deprived of liberty, the child should have the right to a medical examination.
Države članice bi morale določiti praktično ureditev v zvezi z zdravniškimi pregledi, ki jih je treba opraviti v skladu s to direktivo, ter v zvezi z dostopom otrok do teh pregledov.
Such a medical examination should be carried out by a physician or another qualified professional, either on the initiative of the competent authorities, in particular where specific health indications give reasons for such an examination, or in response to a request of the child, of the holder of parental responsibility or of the child's lawyer.
Ta ureditev bi lahko med drugim urejala primere, ko se za istega otroka v kratkem času podata dve ali več zahtev za zdravniški pregled.
Member States should lay down practical arrangements concerning medical examinations that are to be carried out in accordance with this Directive, and concerning access by children to such examinations.
Otroci, ki so osumljene ali obdolžene osebe, ne morejo vedno razumeti vsebine zaslišanj, predmet katerih so.
Such arrangements could, inter alia, address situations where two or more requests for medical examinations are made in respect of the same child in a short period of time.
Da bi zagotovili zadostno varstvo takšnih otrok, bi bilo zato treba zaslišanje s strani policije ali drugih organov preprečevanja, odkrivanja in preiskovanja kaznivih dejanj snemati z avdiovizualnimi sredstvi, kadar je to sorazmerno, med drugim ob upoštevanju, ali je pri zaslišanju navzoč odvetnik in ali je otroku odvzeta prostost, pri čemer se razume, da se vedno upošteva predvsem korist otroka.
Children who are suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings are not always able to understand the content of questioning to which they are subject.
Ta direktiva od držav članic ne zahteva, da je treba z avdiovizualnimi sredstvi snemati zaslišanje otrok pred sodnikom ali na sodišču.
In order to ensure sufficient protection of such children, questioning by police or by other law enforcement authorities should therefore be audio-visually recorded where it is proportionate to do so, taking into account, inter alia, whether or not a lawyer is present and whether or not the child is deprived of liberty, it being understood that the child's best interests should always be a primary consideration.
Kadar se v skladu s to direktivo zahteva snemanje z avdiovizualnimi sredstvi, vendar je zaradi nepremostljive tehnične težave to snemanje nemogoče, lahko policija ali drug organ preprečevanja, odkrivanja ali preiskovanja kaznivih dejanj otroka zasliši brez snemanja z avdiovizualnimi sredstvi, pod pogojem, da so bili vloženi razumni napori za odpravo tehnične težave, da z zaslišanjem ne bi bilo primerno odlašati in da je to skladno s koristjo otroka.
This Directive does not require Member States to make audiovisual recordings of questioning of children by a judge or a court.
Ne glede na to, ali se zaslišanje otroka snema z avdiovizualnimi sredstvi, bi bilo treba zaslišanje v vsakem primeru izvesti na način, ki upošteva starost in zrelost zadevnega otroka.
Where an audiovisual recording is to be made in accordance with this Directive but an insurmountable technical problem renders it impossible to make such a recording, the police or other law enforcement authorities should be able to question the child without it being audio-visually recorded, provided that reasonable efforts have been made to overcome the technical problem, that it is not appropriate to postpone the questioning, and that it is compatible with the child's best interests.
Otroci so v posebej ranljivem položaju, ko jim je odvzeta prostost.
Whether or not the questioning of children is audio-visually recorded, questioning should in any event be carried out in a manner that takes into account the age and maturity of the children concerned.
Zaradi morebitnih tveganj v zvezi s telesnim, duševnim in socialnim razvojem otrok in ker bi odvzem prostosti lahko privedel do težav pri njihovem ponovnem vključevanju v družbo, bi si bilo zato treba posebej prizadevati, da bi se izognili odvzemu prostosti otrok in zlasti pridržanju otrok v kateri koli fazi postopka, preden sodišče sprejme dokončno odločitev, ali je otrok storil kaznivo dejanje ali ne.
Children are in a particularly vulnerable position when they are deprived of liberty.
Države članice bi lahko določile praktično ureditev, kot so smernice ali navodila policistom, o izvajanju te zahteve v primerih policijskega pridržanja.
Special efforts should therefore be undertaken to avoid deprivation of liberty and, in particular, detention of children at any stage of the proceedings before the final determination by a court of the question whether the child concerned has committed the criminal offence, given the possible risks for their physical, mental and social development, and because deprivation of liberty could lead to difficulties as regards their reintegration into society.
Ta zahteva ne posega v možnost, da policija ali drug organ preprečevanja, odkrivanja in preiskovanja kaznivih dejanj otroku odvzame prostost, kadar se to zdi nujno že na prvi pogled, na primer če je zaloten pri kaznivem dejanju ali takoj po tem, ko je bilo to storjeno.
Member States could make practical arrangements, such as guidelines or instructions to police officers, on the application of this requirement to situations of police custody.
Pristojni organi bi morali vedno preučiti alternativne ukrepe namesto pridržanja in imeti take ukrepe na voljo, kadar je to mogoče.
In any case, this requirement is without prejudice to the possibility for police officers or other law enforcement authorities to apprehend a child in situations where it seems, prima facie, to be necessary to do so, such as in flagrante delicto or immediately after a criminal offence has been committed.
Takšni alternativni ukrepi bi lahko vključevali prepoved, da se otrok zadržuje na določenih mestih, obveznost, da prebiva na določenem mestu, omejevanje stikov z določenimi osebami, obveznost javljanja pristojnim organom, udeležbo v vzgojnih programih ali, če otrok v to privoli, udeležbo v terapevtskih programih ali zdravljenju zasvojenosti.
The competent authorities should always consider measures alternative to detention (alternative measures) and should have recourse to such measures where possible.
Pridržanje otrok bi moralo biti predmet redne sodne presoje, ki jo lahko opravi tudi sodnik posameznik.
Such alternative measures could include a prohibition for the child to be in certain places, an obligation for the child to reside in a specific place, restrictions concerning contact with specific persons, reporting obligations to the competent authorities, participation in educational programmes, or, subject to the child's consent, participation in therapeutic or addiction programmes.
Moralo bi biti mogoče, da takšno redno presojo opravi sodišče po uradni dolžnosti ali pa na zahtevo otroka, otrokovega odvetnika ali pravosodnega organa, ki ni sodišče, zlasti tožilca.
Detention of children should be subject to periodic review by a court, which could also be a judge sitting alone.
Države članice bi morale glede tega določiti praktično ureditev, tudi kar zadeva primere, ko je sodišče po uradni dolžnosti že opravilo redno presojo in otrok ali otrokov odvetnik zahteva ponovno presojo.
It should be possible to carry out such periodic review ex officio by the court, or at the request of the child, of the child's lawyer or of a judicial authority which is not a court, in particular a prosecutor.
Kadar so otroci pridržani, bi morali zanje veljati posebni zaščitni ukrepi.
Member States should provide for practical arrangements in that respect, including regarding the situation where a periodic review has already been carried out ex officio by the court and the child or the child's lawyer requests that another review be carried out.
Zlasti bi morali biti otroci pridržani ločeno od odraslih, razen če se v skladu s členom 37(c) Konvencije Združenih narodov o otrokovih pravicah oceni, da je v korist otroka, da se to ne stori.
Where children are detained they should benefit from special protection measures.
Ko pridržani otrok dopolni 18 let, bi moralo biti mogoče, da je še naprej pridržan ločeno od odraslih, kadar je to upravičeno, in sicer ob upoštevanju okoliščin zadevne osebe.
In particular, they should be held separately from adults unless it is considered to be in the child's best interests not to do so, in accordance with Article 37(c) of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Posebno pozornost bi bilo treba nameniti načinu ravnanja s pridržanimi otroki, saj so ti že po naravi ranljivi.
When a detained child reaches the age of 18, it should be possible to continue separate detention where warranted, taking into account the circumstances of the person concerned.
Otroci bi morali imeti dostop do izobraževalnih institucij v skladu s svojimi potrebami.
Particular attention should be paid to the manner in which detained children are treated given their inherent vulnerability.
Države članice bi morale zagotoviti tudi, da so otroci, ki so osumljene ali obdolžene osebe in ki so v policijskem pridržanju, pridržani ločeno od odraslih, razen če se oceni, da je v korist otroka, da se to ne stori, oziroma če v izjemnih okoliščinah tega v praksi ni mogoče zagotoviti, pod pogojem, da so otroci pridržani skupaj z odraslimi na način, ki je skladen s koristjo otroka.
Children should have access to educational facilities according to their needs.
Na redko poseljenih območjih bi na primer moralo biti izjemoma mogoče, da so otroci v policijskem pridržanju skupaj z odraslimi, razen če je to v nasprotju s koristjo otroka.
Member States should ensure that children who are suspects or accused persons and kept in police custody are held separately from adults, unless it is considered to be in the child's best interests not to do so, or unless, in exceptional circumstances, it is not possible in practice to do so, provided that children are held together with adults in a manner that is compatible with the child's best interests.
V takih primerih bi morali biti pristojni organi še posebej pozorni, da zaščitijo telesno celovitost in dobrobit otroka.
For example, in sparsely populated areas, it should be possible, exceptionally, for children to be held in police custody with adults, unless this is contrary to the child's best interests.
Moralo bi biti mogoče, da so otroci pridržani skupaj z mlajšimi odraslimi osebami, razen če je to v nasprotju s koristjo otroka.
In such situations, particular vigilance should be required on the part of competent authorities in order to protect the child's physical integrity and well-being.
Države članice bi morale v skladu z nacionalnim pravom in postopki določiti, katere osebe se obravnavajo kot mlajše odrasle osebe.
It should be possible to detain children with young adults unless this is contrary to the child's best interests.
Države članice se spodbuja, da določijo, da osebe, starejše od 24 let, ne morejo biti obravnavane kot mlajše odrasle osebe.
It is for Member States to determine which persons are considered to be young adults in accordance with their national law and procedures.
Kadar so otroci pridržani, bi morale države članice sprejeti ustrezne ukrepe, kakor določa ta direktiva.
Member States are encouraged to determine that persons older than 24 years do not qualify as young adults.
S temi ukrepi bi morale med drugim zagotoviti učinkovito in redno uveljavljanje pravice do družinskega življenja.
Where children are detained, Member States should take appropriate measures as set out in this Directive.
Otroci bi morali imeti pravico do vzdrževanja rednih stikov s svojimi starši, družino in prijatelji v obliki obiskov in dopisovanja, razen če so zaradi koristi otroka ali zaradi pravičnosti potrebne izjemne omejitve.
Such measures should, inter alia, ensure the effective and regular exercise of the right to family life.
Države članice bi morale sprejeti tudi ustrezne ukrepe za zagotovitev spoštovanja otrokove svobode veroizpovedi oziroma prepričanja.
Children should have the right to maintain regular contact with their parents, family and friends through visits and correspondence, unless exceptional restrictions are required in the child's best interests or in the interests of justice.
V zvezi s tem bi se morale zlasti vzdržati posegov v veroizpoved oziroma prepričanje otroka.
Member States should also take appropriate measures to ensure respect for the freedom of religion or belief of the child.
Vendar pa se od držav članic ne zahteva, da morajo otrokom dejavno pomagati pri bogoslužju.
In that regard, Member States should, in particular, refrain from interfering with the religion or belief of the child.
Države članice bi morale, kadar je to primerno, sprejeti ustrezne ukrepe tudi v drugih primerih odvzema prostosti.
Member States are not, however, required to take active steps to assist children in worshipping.
Sprejeti ukrepi bi morali biti sorazmerni in primerni glede na vrsto odvzema prostosti, na primer policijsko pridržanje ali pripor, ter glede na njegovo trajanje.
Where appropriate, Member States should also take appropriate measures in other situations of deprivation of liberty.
Strokovni delavci, ki so v neposrednem stiku z otroki, bi morali upoštevati posebne potrebe otrok različnih starostnih skupin in zagotoviti, da se jim postopek prilagodi.
The measures taken should be proportionate and appropriate to the nature of the deprivation of liberty, such as police custody or detention, and to its duration.
V te namene bi bilo treba navedene strokovne delavce posebej usposobiti na področju ravnanja z otroki.
Professionals in direct contact with children should take into account the particular needs of children of different age groups and should ensure that the proceedings are adapted to them.
Otroke bi bilo treba obravnavati na način, ki ustreza njihovi starosti, zrelosti in ravni razumevanja, ob upoštevanju morebitnih posebnih potreb, vključno z morebitnimi težavami pri sporazumevanju.
For those purposes, those professionals should be specially trained in dealing with children.
Ob upoštevanju razlik med pravnimi tradicijami in sistemi v državah članicah bi bilo treba v kazenskem postopku na najboljši možen način zagotoviti zasebnost otrok, da se jim med drugim olajša ponovno vključitev v družbo.
Children should be treated in a manner appropriate to their age, maturity and level of understanding, taking into account any special needs, including any communication difficulties, that they may have.
Države članice bi morale zagotoviti, da so sodne obravnave, v katerih so udeleženi otroci, običajno zaprte za javnost ali da lahko sodišča ali sodniki odločijo, da se take obravnave zaprejo za javnost.
Taking into account the differences between the legal traditions and systems across the Member States, the privacy of children during criminal proceedings should be ensured in the best possible way with a view, inter alia, to facilitating the reintegration of children into society.
To ne vpliva na javno izrekanje sodb v skladu s členom 6 EKČP.
Member States should provide that court hearings involving children are usually held in the absence of the public, or allow courts or judges to decide to hold such hearings in the absence of the public.
Otroci bi morali imeti pravico, da jih na sodni obravnavi, v kateri so udeleženi, spremlja nosilec starševske odgovornosti.
This is without prejudice to judgments being pronounced publicly in accordance with Article 6 ECHR.
Če imata oziroma imajo za istega otroka starševsko odgovornost več kot ena oseba, bi moral imeti otrok pravico, da ga spremljajo vsi, razen če to v praksi kljub razumnim prizadevanjem pristojnih organov ni mogoče.
Children should have the right to be accompanied by the holder of parental responsibility during court hearings in which they are involved.
Države članice bi morale določiti praktično ureditev glede tega, kako naj otroci uveljavljajo pravico, da jih na sodni obravnavi, v kateri so udeleženi, spremlja nosilec starševske odgovornosti, in glede pogojev, pod katerimi je mogoče osebo, ki spremlja otroka, začasno izključiti iz sodne obravnave.
If more than one person holds parental responsibility for the same child, the child should have the right to be accompanied by all of them, unless this is not possible in practice despite the competent authorities' reasonable efforts.
Taka ureditev lahko med drugim ureja primere, ko nosilec starševske odgovornosti začasno ni na voljo, da spremlja otroka, ali ko nosilec starševske odgovornosti ne želi izkoristiti možnosti, da spremlja otroka, pod pogojem, da je takšna ureditev v korist otroka.
Member States should lay down practical arrangements for the exercise by children of the right to be accompanied by the holder of parental responsibility during court hearings in which they are involved and concerning the conditions under which an accompanying person may be temporarily excluded from court hearings.
V nekaterih okoliščinah, ki se lahko nanašajo tudi samo na enega od nosilcev starševske odgovornosti, bi otrok moral imeti pravico, da ga na sodni obravnavi spremlja ustrezna odrasla oseba, ki ni nosilec starševske odgovornosti.
Such arrangements could, inter alia, address the situation where the holder of parental responsibility is temporarily not available to accompany the child or where the holder does not want to make use of the possibility to accompany the child, provided that the child's best interests are taken into account.
Primer take okoliščine je obstoj resnega tveganja za kazenski postopek, če bi otroka spremljal nosilec starševske odgovornosti, zlasti v primeru, ko objektivne in dejanske okoliščine kažejo ali vzbujajo sum, da bi lahko prišlo do uničenja in spreminjanja dokazov, do vplivanja na priče ali da bi utegnil biti nosilec starševske odgovornosti udeležen pri domnevni kaznivi dejavnosti.
In certain circumstances, which can also relate to only one of the persons holding parental responsibility, the child should have the right to be accompanied during court hearings by an appropriate adult other than the holder of parental responsibility.
V skladu s to direktivo bi morali imeti otroci pravico, da jih nosilec starševske odgovornosti spremlja tudi v drugih fazah postopka, v katerih so udeleženi, na primer med policijskim zaslišanjem.
One of those circumstances is where the holder of parental responsibility accompanying the child could substantially jeopardise the criminal proceedings, in particular where objective and factual circumstances indicate or give rise to the suspicion that evidence may be destroyed or altered, witnesses may be interfered with, or the holder of parental responsibility may have been involved with the child in the alleged criminal activity.
Pravica obdolženca do osebne navzočnosti na sojenju temelji na pravici do poštenega sojenja iz člena 47 Listine in iz člena 6 EKČP, kakor ju razlagata Sodišče in Evropsko sodišče za človekove pravice.
In accordance with this Directive, children should also have the right to be accompanied by the holder of parental responsibility during other stages of the proceedings at which they are present, such as during police questioning.
Države članice bi morale sprejeti ustrezne ukrepe, da se spodbudi navzočnost otrok na sojenju, vključno z osebno vročitvijo poziva in pošiljanjem izvoda poziva nosilcu starševske odgovornosti ali, če bi bilo to v nasprotju s koristjo otroka, drugi ustrezni odrasli osebi.