natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Article 12(3) contains no derogation regarding the applicable legal remedies.
določijo, da obravnava prosilcev v zvezi s honorarji in drugimi stroški ni ugodnejša od obravnave njihovih državljanov v zadevah, ki se nanašajo na pravno pomoč,
The legal remedies mentioned in Article 13(1) of the Return Directive therefore have to be provided for also when the standard form mentioned in Article 12(3) is used.
zahtevajo, da se jim v celoti ali delno povrnejo vsi odobreni stroški, če in kadar se finančni položaj prosilca znatno izboljša ali če je bila odločitev o dodelitvi takih stroškov sprejeta na podlagi neresničnih informacij, ki jih je predložil prosilec.
Legal basis: Return Directive — Article 13(1) and (2)
Učinkovito pravno sredstvo zoper zavrnitev odobritve brezplačne pravne pomoči: kadar odločitev, da se brezplačna pravna pomoč in zastopanje ne dodelita, sprejme organ, ki ni sodišče, države članice zagotovijo pravico prosilca do učinkovitega pravnega sredstva zoper to odločitev pred sodiščem.
The third-country national concerned shall be afforded an effective remedy to appeal against or seek review of decisions related to return, as referred to in Article 12(1), before a competent judicial or administrative authority or a competent body composed of members who are impartial and who enjoy safeguards of independence.
Pravica do učinkovitega pravnega sredstva in nepristranskega sodišča je ena od temeljnih pravic, ki je sestavni del pravnega reda Evropske unije, te pravice pa je treba spoštovati tudi takrat, kadar veljavna zakonodaja izrecno ne opredeljuje take postopkovne zahteve.
Effective remedies should be provided as regards all decisions related to return.
Pravna podlaga: direktiva o vračanju – člen 14(1)
The term ‘decisions related to return’ should be understood broadly, covering decisions on all issues regulated by the Return Directive, including return decisions, decisions granting or extending a period for voluntary departure, removal decisions, decisions on postponement of removal, decisions on entry bans as well as on suspension or withdrawal of entry bans (see section 12.2).
Razen v primerih iz členov 16 in 17, države članice zagotovijo, da se za državljane tretjih držav v obdobju za prostovoljni odhod, odobrenem v skladu s členom 7, in v obdobjih, za katera je bila odstranitev odložena v skladu s členom 9, po možnosti upoštevajo naslednja načela:
The remedies applicable in case of detention decisions as well as prolongation of detention are regulated in more detail in Article 15 of the Return Directive concerning detention (see section 14).
ohrani se enotnost družine z družinskimi člani, prisotnimi na njihovem ozemlju;
Nature of reviewing body: in line with Article 6 and 13 ECHR and Article 47 CFR, the appeal body must in substance be an independent and impartial tribunal.
zagotovi se nujna zdravstvena oskrba in osnovno zdravljenje;
Article 13(1) of the Return Directive is closely inspired by CoE Guideline 5.1 and it should be interpreted in accordance with relevant European Court of Human Rights (‘ECtHR’) case-law.
mladoletnikom se zagotovi dostop do osnovnega izobraževalnega sistema ob upoštevanju dolžine prebivanja;
In line with this case-law, the reviewing body can also be an administrative authority provided that this authority is composed of members who are impartial and who enjoy safeguards of independence and that national provisions provide for the possibility to have the decision reviewed by a judicial authority, in line with the standards set by Article 47 CFR on the right to an effective remedy.
upoštevajo se posebne potrebe ranljivih oseb.
Several safeguards exist to counter the risk of an eventual abuse of the possibility to appeal: Article 13 does not provide for an automatic suspensive effect in all circumstances (paragraph 2) and free legal assistance may be limited if the appeal is unlikely to succeed (paragraph 4).
Pretekla razhajanja/razlaga: direktiva o vračanju državam članicam prepušča odločitev, ali bodo nezakonito prebivajočim državljanom tretjih držav izdale odločbe o vrnitvi ali pa jim odobrile pravico do prebivanja.
Attention should also be paid to the general principle of Union law of res judicata.
Ta pristop naj bi prispeval k odpravi pomanjkljivosti.
The deadlines for lodging appeals against decisions related to return must be set by national law.
Druge pomembne pravice iz direktive o pogojih za sprejem, kot so dostop do trga dela in materialni pogoji za sprejem, niso bile omenjene.
The Commission recommends that, to avoid possible misuse of rights and procedures, in particular appeals lodged shortly before the scheduled date of removal, Member States provide for the shortest deadline for lodging appeals against return decisions established by national law in comparable situations, provided that it does not represent a disproportionate interference with the right to an effective remedy.
Po pogajanjih, med katerimi je bila izražena zaskrbljenost, da bi se lahko sklici na direktivo o pogojih za sprejem dojemali kot „nadgradnja“ položaja migrantov brez urejenega statusa in bi tako poslali napačno politično sporočilo, je bil vzpostavljen „samostojen“ seznam pravic.
Judicial decisions should intervene without undue delays.
Obseg primerov, zajetih v členu 14(1), je širok: zajema obdobje za prostovoljni odhod in obdobja, za katera je bila odstranitev formalno ali dejansko odložena v skladu s členom 9 direktive o vračanju (na primer pritožba s suspenzivnim učinkom, morebitna kršitev načela nevračanja, zdravstveni razlogi, tehnični razlogi, neuspeh prizadevanj za odstranitev zaradi pomanjkanja identifikacijskih podatkov).
The authority or body mentioned in paragraph 1 shall have the power to review decisions related to return, as referred to in Article 12(1), including the possibility of temporarily suspending their enforcement, unless a temporary suspension is already applicable under national legislation.
Obdobja, ki jih oseba preživi v pridržanju, so izrecno izključena, saj so povezani varovalni ukrepi urejeni drugje (glej oddelek 15).
Suspensive effect: the appeal body must have the power to suspend the enforcement of a return decision in individual cases.
Zagotovitev nujne zdravstvene oskrbe in potrebnega zdravljenja je temeljna minimalna pravica, dostop do take oskrbe pa ne sme biti odvisen od plačila pristojbin.
It should be clearly provided for in national legislation that the reviewing body itself (the body reviewing the decision related to return) has the power to suspend the enforcement within the frame of one procedure.
Dostop do izobraževanja: omejitev „ob upoštevanju dolžine prebivanja“ bi bilo treba razlagati ozko.
Obligation to grant automatic suspensive effect in case of risk of refoulement: ECtHR case-law requires automatic suspensive effect in cases in which there are substantial grounds for believing that the person, if returned, will be exposed to a real risk of ill-treatment contrary to Article 3 ECHR (risk of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment upon return) — see Rule 39, Rules of the ECtHR.
V primeru dvoma glede verjetnega trajanja bivanja pred vrnitvijo je bolje, da se dostop do izobraževanja odobri, kot da se ne odobri.
Article 13 of the Return Directive — interpreted in conjunction with Articles 5 and 9 of the Return Directive — thus obliges the reviewing body to grant ipso jure suspensive effect in line with this requirement if the principle of non-refoulement is at stake.
Nacionalna praksa, v skladu s katero se dostop do izobraževalnega sistema običajno odobri le, če bivanje traja več kot štirinajst dni, se lahko šteje za sprejemljivo.
Obligation to grant automatic suspensive effect in case of risk of grave and irreversible deterioration of state of health: in its judgement in Case C-562/13, Abdida [68] (paragraph 53), the ECJ confirmed: ‘Articles 5 and 13 of Directive 2008/115/EC, taken in conjunction with Articles 19(2) and 47 of the Charter, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which does not make provision for a remedy with suspensive effect in respect of a return decision whose enforcement may expose the third-country national concerned to a serious risk of grave and irreversible deterioration in his state of health’.
Ustrezne rešitve za praktične težave, kot so primeri, ko mladoletnik nima dokazila o izobrazbi, ki jo je že pridobil v drugih državah, ali primeri, ko mladoletnik ne govori nobenega od jezikov, v katerih poteka izobraževanje v državi članici, je treba poiskati na ravni držav, pri tem pa upoštevati duh direktive in ustreznih mednarodnih pravnih instrumentov, kot sta Konvencija o otrokovih pravicah iz leta 1989 in splošna pripomba št. 6 h Konvenciji [72].
The Commission recommends granting automatic suspensive effect to appeals against return decision only in the compulsory cases mentioned above, to strike the right balance between the right to an effective remedy and the need to ensure the effectiveness of return procedures.
Kot podlaga za take rešitve bi se lahko uporabil tudi pravni red na področju azila (zlasti člen 14 direktive o pogojih za sprejem).Druge osnovne potrebe: Sodišče je v sodbi v zadevi Abdida, C-562/13, ugotovilo, da morajo države članice poskrbeti tudi za zadovoljevanje drugih osnovnih potreb in zagotoviti, da sta nujna zdravstvena oskrba in osnovno zdravljenje dejansko na voljo v obdobju, v katerem mora zadevna država članica odložiti odstranitev.
When the appeal refers to other reasons (for example procedural shortcomings, respect of family unity, protection of other rights or interests) and when irreparable damage to life or serious risk of grave and irreversible deterioration of the state of health are not at stake, Member State can decide not to grant automatic suspensive effect to appeals.
Naloga držav članic je, da določijo obliko tega zadovoljevanja osnovnih potreb zadevnega državljana tretje države.
However, the competent national authorities or bodies must in any case retain the power to decide to temporarily suspend the enforcement of a decision in individual cases where deemed necessary for other reasons (for example family life, healthcare or best interests of the child).
Utemeljitev, na katero se je Sodišče oprlo pri določitvi te obveznosti, je, da bi se lahko zagotovitvi nujne zdravstvene oskrbe in osnovnega zdravljenja, določeni v členu 14(1)(b) direktive o vračanju, odvzel polni učinek, če je ne bi spremljala zahteva po zadovoljevanju osnovnih potreb zadevnega državljana tretje države.
Legal basis: Return Directive — Article 13(3) and (4); Directive 2013/32/EU (the ‘Asylum Procedures Directive’) — Articles 20 and 21, replacing Article 15(3) to (6) of Council Directive 2005/85/EC [69]3.
Na podlagi te utemeljitve Sodišča in glede na navedeno v upoštevni sodni praksi ESČP je mogoče izpeljati, da uživanje drugih pravic, naštetih v členu 14(1) direktive o vračanju (kot sta zlasti dostop do izobraževanja in upoštevanje potreb ranljivih oseb), prav tako spremlja zahteva po zadovoljevanju osnovnih potreb zadevnega državljana tretje države.
The third-country national concerned shall have the possibility to obtain legal advice, representation and, where necessary, linguistic assistance.
Čeprav v zakonodaji Unije ni splošne pravne obveznosti zadovoljevanja osnovnih potreb vseh državljanov tretjih držav pred vrnitvijo, Komisija države članice spodbuja, da to storijo v skladu z nacionalno zakonodajo, da se zagotovijo humani in dostojanstveni pogoji za bivanje oseb v postopku vračanja.
Linguistic assistance implies not only an obligation to provide for a translation of a decision (already covered by Article 12(2) of the Return Directive) but also an obligation to make available assistance by interpreters in order to allow the third-country national to exercise the procedural rights afforded to him/her under Article 13 of the Directive.
Pravna podlaga: direktiva o vračanju – člen 14(2)
It should be recalled that in the case Conka v Belgium [70], the ECtHR identified the availability of interpreters as one of the factors which affect the accessibility of an effective remedy.
Države članice v skladu z nacionalno zakonodajo osebam iz odstavka 1 izročijo pisno potrdilo, da je bilo obdobje za prostovoljni odhod podaljšano v skladu s členom 7(2) ali da se odločba o vrnitvi začasno ne izvrši.
The rights of the third-county national to receive linguistic assistance should be granted by Member States in a way which provides the person concerned with a concrete and practical possibility to make use of it (effet utile of the provision).
V uvodni izjavi 12 direktive o vračanju je navedeno: „Da bi lahko dokazale poseben položaj v primeru upravnih kontrol ali preverjanj, bi morale te osebe prejeti pisno potrdilo o svojem položaju.
4.
Države članice bi morale imeti veliko svobode pri odločanju glede oblike in obrazca pisnega potrdila, ki bi ga lahko vključile tudi v odločbe v zvezi z vrnitvijo, sprejete v skladu s to direktivo.“
Member States shall ensure that the necessary legal assistance and/or representation is granted on request free of charge in accordance with relevant national legislation or rules regarding legal aid, and may provide that such free legal assistance and/or representation is subject to conditions as set out in Article 15(3) to (6) of Directive 2005/85/EC.
Oblika pisnega potrdila: v zvezi s tem imajo države članice veliko svobode.
Legal assistance and legal representation: paragraph 4 specifies in which cases and under which conditions Member States have to cover the costs for legal advice and representation — referring in essence to the conditions enumerated in the Asylum Procedures Directive.
Potrdilo je lahko bodisi ločen dokument, ki ga izdajo nacionalni organi, bodisi del uradne odločbe v zvezi z vrnitvijo.
Member States must provide both legal assistance and legal representation free of charge if the conditions foreseen in the Directive and national implementing legislation are met.
Pomembno je, da osebi v postopku vračanja omogoča, da v primeru policijske kontrole jasno dokaže, da v zvezi z njo že poteka postopek izdaje odločbe o vrnitvi in da ji je bilo odobreno obdobje za prostovoljni odhod ali uradni odlog odstranitve ali da ji je bila izdana odločba o vrnitvi, ki je trenutno ni mogoče izvršiti.
The request for free legal assistance and/or legal representation can be made by the returnee or his/her representative at any appropriate moment of the procedure.
Na potrdilu bi moralo biti po možnosti navedeno trajanje obdobja za prostovoljni odhod ali odloga.
Provision of legal advice by administrative authorities: legal advice may in principle be offered also by the administrative authorities responsible for issuing the return decisions, if the information provided for is objective and unbiased (effet utile).
V državah članicah, kjer sistemi za izmenjavo podatkov omogočajo hitro preverjanje statusa migrantov brez urejenega statusa na podlagi določenih osebnih podatkov ali referenčnih številk v primeru policijskih kontrol, se lahko šteje, da je zahteva glede pisnega potrdila izpolnjena, če se osebi zagotovijo dokumenti, ki vsebujejo te osebne podatke ali referenčne številke, ali če oseba že ima take dokumente.
It is important that the information is provided by a person who acts impartially/independently so as to avoid possible conflicts of interests.
Neodstranljivim osebam v postopku vračanja ni treba izdati dovoljenja: če postane jasno, da ni več mogoče upravičeno pričakovati odstranitve, se od držav članic ne zahteva, da osebam v postopku vračanja izdajo dovoljenje, vendar lahko to storijo v skladu s členom 6(4) direktive o vračanju (glej oddelek 5.6).
This information cannot be provided therefore by the person deciding on or reviewing the case, for instance.
V zvezi s tem je Sodišče v sodbi v zadevi Mahdi, C-146/14 [73] (točki 87 in 88), izrecno pojasnilo: „[…] ta direktiva ni namenjena urejanju pogojev za prebivanje na ozemlju držav članic nezakonito prebivajočih državljanov tretjih držav, glede katerih ni mogoče oziroma ni bilo mogoče izvršiti odločbe o vrnitvi. […] Vendar člen 6(4) Direktive 2008/115/ES državam članicam omogoča, da izdajo nevezano dovoljenje za prebivanje ali drugo dovoljenje, ki iz sočutja, humanitarnih razlogov ali drugih razlogov zagotavlja pravico do prebivanja državljanu tretje države, ki nezakonito prebiva na njihovem ozemlju.“
A good practice, already in use in some Member States, is to separate between the decision making authorities and those providing legal and procedural information.
Merila, ki jih je treba upoštevati pri izdaji dovoljenja: kot je bilo poudarjeno, države članice niso pravno obvezane, da izdajo dovoljenja neodstranljivim osebam v postopku vračanja, in imajo pri odločanju o tem veliko svobode.
However, should a Member State decide to allocate the latter responsibility to the decision making authorities, a clear separation of tasks should be ensured for the personnel involved, for instance by creating a separate and independent section in charge only of providing legal and procedural information.
V tem okviru je priporočljivo, da ocenjevalna merila, ki bi jih lahko upoštevale države članice, vključujejo posamezne elemente (povezane s posameznim primerom) in horizontalne elemente (povezane s politiko), kot so zlasti:
Conditions for free legal assistance/representation — reference to Article 15(3) to (6) of Directive 2005/85/EC: the reference to certain conditions/limitations which Member States may foresee in respect of free legal aid is a dynamic reference and must be read as reference to the current Articles 20 and 21 of the Asylum Procedures Directive currently in force and replacing Directive 2005/85/EC.
sodelovanje/nesodelovanje osebe v postopku vračanja,
In accordance with the above-mentioned provisions, Member States may provide that the free legal assistance and representation is only granted:
trajanje dejanskega bivanja osebe v postopku vračanja v državi članici,
where the appeal is considered by a court or tribunal or other competent authority to have tangible prospect of success,
prizadevanje osebe v postopku vračanja za vključitev,
through the services provided by legal advisers or other counsellors specifically designated by national law to assist and represent applicants,
družinske vezi,
in first instance appeal procedures and not for further appeals or reviews.
humanitarni vidiki;
Member States may also:
verjetnost vrnitve v bližnji prihodnosti,
impose monetary and/or time limits on the provision of free legal assistance and representation, provided that such limits do not arbitrarily restrict access to this right,
potreba po izogibanju nagrajevanju nezakonitega prebivanja,
provide that, as regards fees and other costs, the treatment of applicants shall not be more favourable than the treatment generally accorded to their nationals in matters pertaining to legal assistance,
vpliv ukrepov za ureditev statusa migrantov na migracijski vzorec morebitnih migrantov (brez urejenega statusa) in
demand to be reimbursed wholly or partially for any costs granted if and when the applicant's financial situation has improved considerably or if the decision to grant such costs was taken on the basis of false information supplied by the applicant.
verjetnost sekundarnega gibanja znotraj schengenskega območja.
Effective remedy against refusal to grant free legal aid: where a decision not to grant free legal assistance and representation is taken by an authority which is not a court or tribunal, Member States shall ensure that the applicant has the right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal against that decision.
Postopkovni varovalni ukrepi iz člena 12 (oblika in prevod) in člen 13 (učinkovita pravna sredstva in brezplačna pravna pomoč) direktive o vračanju izrecno izražajo temeljno pravico do dobrega upravljanja, temeljno pravico osebe, da se izjasni, ter temeljno pravico do učinkovitega pravnega sredstva in nepristranskega sodišča, ki so sestavni deli pravnega reda Evropske unije.
The right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial is among the fundamental rights forming an integral part of the European Union legal order and observance of those rights is required even where the applicable legislation does not expressly provide for such a procedural requirement.
Te pravice je treba torej spoštovati tudi v zvezi z odločbami o pridržanju.
Legal basis: Return Directive — Article 14(1)
Poleg teh splošnih zahtev člen 15 direktive o vračanju določa nekatere zahteve, ki se uporabljajo posebej v zvezi z odločbami o pridržanju.
Member States shall, with the exception of the situation covered in Articles 16 and 17, ensure that the following principles are taken into account as far as possible in relation to third-country nationals during the period for voluntary departure granted in accordance with Article 7 and during periods for which removal has been postponed in accordance with Article 9:
Pravna podlaga: direktiva o vračanju – člen 15(1)
family unity with family members present in their territory is maintained;
Razen če v določenem primeru ni možno učinkovito uporabiti drugih zadostnih, vendar manj prisilnih ukrepov, lahko države članice pridržijo državljana tretje države, ki je v postopku vračanja, le, da pripravijo vrnitev in/ali izvedejo postopek odstranitve, zlasti če:
emergency healthcare and essential treatment of illness are provided;
obstaja nevarnost pobega ali
minors are granted access to the basic education system subject to the length of their stay;
se zadevni državljan tretje države izogiba ali ovira pripravo vrnitve ali postopek odstranitve.
special needs of vulnerable persons are taken into account.
Obdobje pridržanja je kar se da kratko in traja le toliko časa, kolikor trajajo postopki za ureditev odstranitve, ti pa se izvedejo skrbno.
Historic reminder/explanation: the Return Directive leaves to Member States the choice of either issuing return decisions to illegally staying third-country nationals or to grant a right to stay.
Odreditev pridržanja z namenom odstranitve je resno poseganje v temeljno pravico oseb do prostosti, zato za tako pridržanje veljajo stroge omejitve.
This approach should help reduce grey areas.
Obveznost, da se pridržanje odredi le kot skrajni ukrep: člen 8(1) direktive o vračanju od držav članic zahteva, da sprejmejo „vse potrebne ukrepe“ za izvršitev odločb o vrnitvi.
It may, however, also increase in practice the absolute number of cases in which Member States issue return decisions which cannot be enforced due to practical or legal obstacles for removal (for example delays in obtaining the necessary papers from third countries and non-refoulement cases).
Možnost odreditve pridržanja je eden od možnih ukrepov, ki jih lahko države članice uporabijo kot skrajni ukrep.
In order to avoid a legal vacuum for these persons, the Commission had proposed to provide for a minimum level of conditions of stay for those illegally staying third-country nationals for whom the enforcement of the return decision has been postponed or who cannot be removed, by referring to the substance of a set of conditions already laid down in Articles 7 to 10, Article 15 and Articles 17 to 20 of Council Directive 2003/9/EC [71] (Reception Conditions Directive), covering — in essence — four basic rights: (1) family unity; (2) healthcare; (3) schooling and education for minors; and (4) respect for special needs of vulnerable persons.
Sodišče je v zvezi s tem v zadevi El Dridi, C-61/11 (točka 41), izrecno poudarilo, da direktiva o vračanju predvideva „stopnjevanj[e] ukrepov, ki jih je treba upoštevati pri izvršitvi odločbe o vrnitvi, pri čemer se to stopnjevanje začne pri ukrepu, ki zadevni osebi pušča največ svobode, to je določitev roka za prostovoljni odhod, in konča pri prisilnih ukrepih, ki svobodo najbolj omejujejo, to je pridržanje v posebnem centru“.
Other important rights under the Reception Conditions Directive, such as access to employment and material reception conditions, were not referred to.
Obveznost držav članic, da uporabijo pridržanje, velja samo v primerih, ko je jasno, da je uporaba pridržanja edini način za zagotovitev, da se lahko pripravi postopek vrnitve in izvede postopek odstranitve (nujnost pridržanja).