natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The independence of the judge should be enshrined in the constitution with more specific rules provided at the legislative level (Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities, adopted on 17 November 2010 (‘the 2010 CoE Recommendation’), paragraph 7).
Nato lahko kandidati vložijo kandidature po rednem postopku, v katerem jih nacionalni sodni svet oceni in predsedniku republike predlaga njihovo imenovanje na mesta vrhovnih sodnikov.
It should also be noted that the Supreme Court and the National Council for the Judiciary in their opinions raised questions of constitutionality of this law.
Zadeva C-222/13, TDC, 9. oktober 2014, točke od 29 do 32; zadeva C-506/04, Wilson, 19. september 2006, točka 53; zadeva C-103/97, Köllensperger in Atzwanger, 4. februar 1999, točke od 20 do 23; zadeva C-54/96, Dorsch Consult, 12. september 1997, točka 36; zadeva C-17/00, De Coster, 29. november 2001, točke od 18 do 21; ESČP, zadeva Baka proti Madžarski, 20261/12, 23. junij 2016, točka 121.
Opinion of the Supreme Court of 3 February 2017; Opinion of the National Council for the Judiciary of 10 February 2017.
ESČP, zadeva Campbell in Fell proti Združenemu kraljestvu, A80 (1984), 28. junij 1984, točka 80.
ECtHR Case Henryk Urban and Ryszard Urban v Poland, 23614/08, 28 February 2011; ECtHR Case Mirosław Garlicki v Poland, 36921/07, 14 September 2011; ECtHR Case Pohoska v Poland, 33530/06, 10 April 2012.
Zakon je v nasprotju s standardi Sveta Evrope.
Article 1(7) of the law on the Ordinary Courts Organisation.
Poleg tega bi morale v skladu s priporočilom Sveta Evrope iz leta 2010 odločitve o izbiri in poklicni poti sodnikov temeljiti na objektivnih merilih, ki jih predhodno določi zakonodaja ali pristojni organi, kadar pa odločitve o izbiri in poklicni poti sodnikov sprejme vlada ali zakonodajna oblast, bi bilo treba za pripravo priporočil ali izražanje mnenj, ki jih v praksi upošteva ustrezen organ za imenovanje, pooblastiti neodvisen in pristojen organ, ki ga v znatnem delu sestavljajo člani iz sodstva.
Article 186(1) of the Polish Constitution: ‘The National Council of the Judiciary shall safeguard the independence of the courts and judges’.
Zakon krši te standarde.
ECtHR Case Ramos Nunes de Carvalho E Sá v Portugal, 55391/13, 57728/13 and 74041/13, 21 June 2016, paragraph 77.
Disciplinski postopki zoper vrhovne sodnike se nanašajo na odgovornost za kršitve pravil poklicnega ravnanja in za ogrožanje dostojanstva njihove funkcije.
Paragraph 27; see also Council of Europe Plan of Action on Strengthening Judicial Independence and Impartiality adopted on 13 April 2016, (CM(2016)36 final) at C item (ii).
Člen 5 zakona o vrhovnem sodišču določa, da disciplinski senat obravnava tudi disciplinske postopke zoper vrhovne sodnike, nekatere disciplinske postopke zoper uslužbence v pravni stroki in pritožbe zoper disciplinske sklepe.
CCJE Opinion No 10 on the Council for the Judiciary in the service of society, at 27; various opinions of the Venice Commission and ENCJ standards in ‘Councils for the Judiciary’ Report 2010-11 at 2.3.
Zakon določa novo sestavo disciplinskih sodišč vrhovnega sodišča: načeloma bo prvostopenjsko disciplinsko sodišče sestavljal en sodnik iz disciplinskega senata, drugostopenjsko disciplinsko sodišče pa trije sodniki.
The Constitution stipulates that the National Council for the Judiciary is composed of ex officio members (the First President of the Supreme Court, the Minister of Justice, the President of the Supreme Administrative Court and a presidential appointee) and elected members.
Začetek disciplinskega postopka lahko predlaga vodja disciplinskega postopka (člen 56(1): vodja disciplinskega postopka, ki ga imenuje vrhovno sodišče za triletno obdobje, in člen 54(4): vodja disciplinskega postopka, ki ga imenuje minister za vsak primer posebej).
The elected members consist of four deputies ‘chosen by the Sejm’, two senators ‘chosen by the Senate’ and 15 judges ( ‘chosen from amongst’ the common, administrative and military courts and the Supreme Court).
Člen 54(1) zakona o vrhovnem sodišču.
This is contrary to Council of Europe standards: 2010 CoE Recommendation (paragraph 26); Council of Europe Plan of Action on Strengthening Judicial Independence and Impartiality adopted on 13 April 2016 (CM(2016)36 final), under C.
Minister za pravosodje vodje disciplinskih postopkov imenuje med tožilci, ki jih predlaga državni tožilec.
ECtHR Cases Morice v France, 29369/10, 23 April 2015, paragraph 78; Cyprus v Turkey, 25781/94, 10 May 2001, paragraph 233.
Zadeva C-503/15, Margarit Panicello, 16. februar 2017, točki 37 in 38; zadeva C-203/14, Consorci Sanitari del Maresme, 6. oktober 2015, točka 19; zadeva C-222/13, TDC, 9. oktober 2014, točka 30; združeni zadevi C-58/13 in C-59/13, Torresi, 17. julij 2014, točka 22; zadeva C-506/04, Wilson, 19. september 2006, točka 51.
2010 Council of Europe Recommendation, paragraph 49.
Člen 6 zakona o spremembi zakona o nacionalnem sodnem svetu; člen 100(1) in (2) zakona o vrhovnem sodišču.
According to the law, the Minister of Justice decides on whether or not to prolong mandate of a judge, ‘taking under consideration rational use of common court personnel and the needs resulting from the workload of particular courts’ (cf.
Člen 1(16) zakona o spremembi zakona o organizaciji splošnih sodišč.
Article 1(26)(b) of the law).
Člen 1(5)(b) zakona o spremembi zakona o organizaciji splošnih sodišč.
Case C-53/03 Syfait and Others, 31 May 2005, paragraph 31; Case C-103/97 Köllensperger and Atzwanger, 4 February 1999, paragraph 20.
Člen 1 zakona o spremembi zakona o nacionalni šoli za sodnike.
Opinion of the Supreme Court of 28 April 2017.
Člen 1(33) zakona o spremembi zakona o organizaciji splošnih sodišč in člen 38 zakona o vrhovnem sodišču.
Article 89(2) of the law on the Supreme Court provides that judges who are dismissed from the Supreme Court retain the right to apply within 14 days from their retirement to the Minister of Justice for a transfer to a judicial post in an ordinary, military or administrative court.
Tudi nove določbe o vodjih sodišč so bile opredeljene kot določbe, ki vzbujajo pomisleke (člen 1 zakona z dne 23. marca 2017 o spremembi zakona o organizaciji splošnih sodišč).
The Minister of Justice has the right to turn down that request.
Na primer mnenja vrhovnega sodišča z dne 30. januarja, 3. februarja, 28. aprila in 18. julija 2017; mnenja nacionalnega sodnega sveta z dne 30. januarja, 10. februarja, 7. marca, 12. maja, 26. maja in 18. julija 2017; mnenja varuha človekovih pravic z dne 1. februarja, 12. aprila, 31. maja, 28. junija in 18. julija 2017; mnenje direktorja nacionalne šole za sodnike in državne tožilce z dne 10. februarja 2017; skupno mnenje sodnikov pritožbenih sodišč v Lublinu z dne 6. februarja 2017; v Gdansku, Krakovu, Białystoku, Szczecinu, Rzeszówu z dne 7. februarja 2017; v Varšavi in Poznanju z dne 8. februarja 2017; sklep predsedstva glavne odvetniške zbornice z dne 3. februarja 2017; mnenje združenja sodnikov „Themis“ z dne 29. januarja 2017; mnenja združenja sodnikov „Iustitia“ z dne 8. februarja 2017; mnenje nacionalnega združenja strokovnih sodelavcev na sodišču z dne 6. februarja 2017; mnenje združenja diplomantov in kandidatov nacionalne šole za sodnike in državne tožilce z dne 7. februarja 2017; mnenje nacionalnega združenja pomočnikov sodnikov z dne 8. februarja 2017.
Subsequently, according to Article 95 of the law on the Supreme Court, the Minister of Justice announces vacancies in particular chambers of the Supreme Court, and then proposes one candidate of his own choosing for each announced vacancy to the National Council for the Judiciary.
Glej Priporočilo (EU) 2017/146 in Priporočilo (EU) 2016/1374.
The National Council for the Judiciary assesses each candidacy and makes a proposal to the President of the Republic for the appointment to a post of a Supreme Court judge.
Oddelek 4.1 Sporočila „Novi okvir EU za krepitev načela pravne države“, COM(2014) 158 final.
In certain cases the National Council for the Judiciary will be able make such a proposal through only one of its Assemblies, thus potentially excluding the Assembly composed of judges-members.
Komisija je v priporočilu z dne 21. decembra 2016 upoštevala zadnje dogodke na Poljskem, ki so se zgodili po izdaji priporočila Komisije dne 27. julija 2016.
The Minister of Justice can make an additional announcement about the remaining vacancies.
Ugotovila je, da je bilo nekaj vprašanj iz zadnjega priporočila sicer obravnavanih, vendar so pomembna vprašanja ostala nerešena, medtem pa so nastali tudi novi pomisleki.
Then, candidates can lodge their candidacies in a regular procedure with the National Council for the Judiciary assessing them and submitting an application to the President of the Republic for their appointment to posts of Supreme Court judges.
Minister za pravosodje je 12. januarja 2017 sprožil postopek pred ustavnim sodiščem za presojo ustavnosti volitev treh sodnikov v ustavno sodišče leta 2010.
Case C-222/13 TDC, 9 October 2014, paragraphs 29-32; Case C-506/04 Wilson, 19 September 2006, paragraph 53; Case C-103/97 Köllensperger and Atzwanger, 4 February 1999, paragraphs 20-23; Case C-54/96 Dorsch Consult, 12 September 1997, paragraph 36; Case C-17/00, De Coster, 29 November 2001, paragraphs 18-21; ECtHR Case Baka v Hungary, 20261/12, 23 June 2016, paragraph 121.
Po začetku tega postopka tem trem sodnikom primeri niso bili več dodeljeni.
ECtHR Case Campbell and Fell v The United Kingdom, A80 (1984), 28 June 1984, paragraph 80.
Evropski svet je 23. junija 2017 na splošno potrdil priporočila za posamezne države, naslovljena na države članice v okviru evropskega semestra 2017.
The law contradicts with Council of Europe standards.
Priporočilo, naslovljeno na Poljsko, vsebuje uvodno izjavo, v kateri je poudarjeno, da sta „[p]ravna varnost ter zaupanje v kakovost in predvidljivost regulativnih, davčnih in drugih politik in institucij […] pomembna dejavnika, ki bi lahko omogočila višjo stopnjo naložb.
In particular, the new rules contradict the principle of irremovability of judges as a key element of the independence of judges as enshrined in the 2010 Council of Europe Recommendation.
V zvezi s tem sta pomembna tudi pravna država in neodvisno sodstvo.
Accordingly, Supreme Court judges should have guaranteed tenure, and their mandates should not be prematurely terminated.
Obravnavanje resnih pomislekov v zvezi s pravno državo bo pripomoglo k večji pravni varnosti.“ Dne 11. julija 2017 je priporočila za posamezne države sprejel Svet za ekonomske in finančne zadeve [5].
Also, according to the 2010 Council of Europe Recommendation, decisions concerning the selection and career of judges should be based on objective criteria pre-established by law or by the competent authorities, and where the government or the legislative power take decisions concerning the selection and career of judges, an independent and competent authority drawn in substantial part from the judiciary should be authorised to make recommendations or express opinions which the relevant appointing authority follows in practice.
To priporočilo dopolnjuje priporočilo z dne 27. julija 2016 in priporočilo z dne 21. decembra 2016.
The law violates these standards.
V njem je preučeno, kateri pomisleki iz navedenih priporočil so bili obravnavani, poleg tega pa so navedeni preostali pomisleki in novi pomisleki Komisije glede pravne države na Poljskem, ki so nastali od takrat.
Disciplinary procedures against Supreme Court judges concern responsibility for offences against the rules of the service and for compromising the dignity of their office.
Kar zadeva sestavo ustavnega sodišča, je v odgovoru, tako kot v prejšnjem odgovoru na priporočilo z dne 27. julija 2016, zanikan kakršen koli učinek na sodbi ustavnega sodišča z dne 3. in 9. decembra 2015.
Article 5 of the law on the Supreme Court stipulates that the disciplinary chamber deals also with disciplinary proceedings against Supreme Court judges, certain disciplinary proceedings against members of legal professions, and with appeals against disciplinary decisions.
Kar zadeva postopek izbora predsednika ustavnega sodišča, je v odgovoru prezrta sodba z dne 7. novembra 2016, v skladu s katero ustava določa, da se predsednik ustavnega sodišča imenuje med kandidati, ki so prejeli večino glasov na generalni skupščini ustavnega sodišča.
The law sets a new composition of the Supreme Courts' disciplinary courts: by default, a first instance disciplinary court will be composed of one judge of the disciplinary chamber; a second instance disciplinary court will be composed of three judges.
Nasprotno, osnutek je bil predložen 12. julija, sprejet pa 22. julija 2017.
The Minister of Justice appoints the disciplinary officers from among prosecutors presented by the State Prosecutor.
Priporočila za posamezne države je na splošno potrdil Evropski svet 23. junija 2017, sprejel pa jih je Svet za ekonomske in finančne zadeve 11. julija 2017 [46].51.
Case C-503/15 Margarit Panicello, 16 February 2017, paragraphs 37-38; Case C-203/14 Consorci Sanitari del Maresme, 6 October 2015, paragraph 19; Case C-222/13 TDC, 9 October 2014, paragraph 30; Joined Cases C-58/13 and C-59/13 Torresi, 17 July 2014, paragraph 22; Case C-506/04 Wilson, 19 September 2006, paragraph 51.
Nova pravila so zlasti v nasprotju z načelom nezamenljivosti sodnikov kot ključnim elementom neodvisnosti sodnikov iz priporočila Sveta Evrope iz leta 2010.
Article 6 of the law amending the law on the National Council for the Judiciary; Article 100(1) and (2) of the law on the Supreme Court.
Skladno s tem bi morali imeti vrhovni sodniki zajamčeno pravico do službenega položaja, njihov mandat pa ne bi smel predčasno prenehati.
Article 1(16) of the law amending the law on the Ordinary Courts Organisation.
Uvodna izjava 14: „Pravna varnost ter zaupanje v kakovost in predvidljivost regulativnih, davčnih in drugih politik in institucij sta pomembna dejavnika, ki bi lahko omogočila višjo stopnjo naložb.
Article 1(5)(b) of the law amending the law on the Ordinary Courts Organisation.
V zvezi s tem sta pomembna tudi pravna država in neodvisno sodstvo.
Article 1 of the law amending the law on the National School of Judiciary.
Obravnavanje resnih pomislekov v zvezi s pravno državo bo pripomoglo k večji pravni varnosti.“ Priporočilo v zvezi z nacionalnim programom reform Poljske za leto 2017 in mnenje Sveta o konvergenčnem programu Poljske za leto 2017.
Article 1(33) of the law amending the law on the Ordinary Courts Organisation and Article 38 of the law on the Supreme Court.
Komisija je 27. julija 2016 sprejela priporočilo v zvezi z načelom pravne države na Poljskem [1], v katerem je navedla svoje pomisleke glede položaja ustavnega sodišča in priporočila, kako naj se odpravijo.
Article 10 of the law amending the law on the National Council for the Judiciary; Article 93 and Article 99 of the law of 20 July on the Supreme Court.
Zato lahko vrhovni sodniki pri razsojanju o zadevah občutijo pritisk, naj sledijo stališču izvršilne oblasti.3.5.3 Zakonodajni postopek
New provisions on the directors of courts have also been identified as raising concerns (Article 1 of the law of 23 March 2017 amending the law on the Ordinary Courts Organisation).
Kot je pojasnjeno zgoraj, Komisija ponovno opozarja, da učinkovita ustavna presoja teh določb trenutno ni mogoča.3.5 Vrhovno sodišče
Having regard to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an Association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Arab Republic of Egypt, of the other part [1], and in particular Article 76 thereof,
ob upoštevanju Evro-mediteranskega sporazuma o pridružitvi med Evropskimi skupnostmi in njihovimi državami članicami na eni strani ter Arabsko republiko Egipt na drugi strani [1] in zlasti člena 76 Sporazuma,
Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/1584
Priporočilo Komisije (EU) 2017/1584
on coordinated response to large-scale cybersecurity incidents and crises
o usklajenem odzivu na velike kibernetske incidente in krize
A cybersecurity incident affecting organisations in more than one Member State or even the entire Union with potential serious disruptions to the internal market and more broadly to the network and information systems on which the Union economy, democracy and society rely is a scenario that Member States and EU institutions have to be well-prepared for.
Kibernetski incidenti lahko sprožijo širšo krizo in vplivajo na sektorje dejavnosti, ki presegajo omrežja in informacijske sisteme ter komunikacijska omrežja; kakršen koli ustrezen odziv mora temeljiti tako na kibernetskih kot tudi nekibernetskih dejavnostih blaženja.
A cybersecurity incident may be considered a crisis at Union level when the disruption caused by the incident is too extensive for a concerned Member State to handle on its own or when it affects two or more Member States with such a wide-ranging impact of technical or political significance that it requires timely coordination and response at Union political level.
Kibernetskih incidentov ni možno predvideti; pogosto se pojavijo in razvijejo v zelo kratkem času, zato morajo prizadeti subjekti in subjekti, odgovorni za odziv na incidente in blaženje njihovih učinkov, hitro uskladiti svoje odzive.
Cybersecurity incidents can trigger a broader crisis, impacting sectors of activity beyond network and information systems and communication networks; any appropriate response must rely upon both cyber and non-cyber mitigation activities.
Poleg tega kibernetski incidenti pogosto niso omejeni na določeno geografsko območje in se lahko istočasno pojavijo v več državah ali bliskovito razširijo po njih.
Cybersecurity incidents are unpredictable, often occur and evolve within very short periods of time and therefore affected entities and those with responsibilities as regards responding to and mitigating the effects of the incident must coordinate their response quickly.
Za učinkovit odziv na velike kibernetske incidente in krize na ravni EU sta nujna hitro in učinkovito sodelovanje med vsemi zadevnimi zainteresiranimi stranmi, ki temelji na pripravljenosti in zmogljivostih posameznih držav članic, in usklajeno skupno ukrepanje, ki ga podpirajo zmogljivosti Unije.
Furthermore, cybersecurity incidents are often not contained with any specific geographical area and may occur simultaneously or spread instantly across many countries.
Pravočasen in učinkovit odziv na incidente zato sloni na že obstoječih ter – kolikor je to možno – dobro utečenih postopkih sodelovanja in mehanizmih, pri čemer so jasno opredeljene vloge in odgovornosti ključnih akterjev na nacionalni ravni in na ravni Unije.
An effective response to large-scale cybersecurity incidents and crises at the EU level requires swift and effective cooperation amongst all relevant stakeholders and relies on the preparedness and capabilities of individual Member States as well as coordinated joint action supported by Union capabilities.
V svojih sklepih [1] o zaščiti kritične informacijske infrastrukture z dne 27. maja 2011 je Svet pozval države članice, naj „okrepijo sodelovanje med državami članicami ter na podlagi nacionalnih izkušenj in rezultatov na področju kriznega upravljanja in v sodelovanju z agencijo ENISA prispevajo k razvoju evropskih mehanizmov sodelovanja v primeru kibernetskih incidentov, ki bodo preskušeni v okviru naslednje vaje CyberEurope v letu 2012“.
Timely and effective response to incidents relies therefore on the existence of previously established and, to the extent possible, well-rehearsed cooperation procedures and mechanisms having clearly defined the roles and responsibilities of the key actors at national and Union level.
V sporočilu z naslovom „Krepitev odpornosti evropskega sistema kibernetske varnosti ter spodbujanje konkurenčne in inovativne industrije kibernetske varnosti“ [2] iz leta 2016 so bile države članice spodbujene, naj čim bolj izkoristijo obstoječe mehanizme sodelovanja iz direktive VOI [3] ter okrepijo čezmejno sodelovanje v zvezi s pripravljenostjo na kibernetske incidente velikih razsežnosti.
In its conclusions [1] on Critical Information Infrastructure Protection of 27 May 2011, the Council invited the EU Member States to ‘strengthen collaboration among Member States and contribute, on the basis of national crisis management experiences and results and in cooperation with ENISA to the development of European cyber incident cooperation mechanisms to be tested in the framework of the next Cyber Europe exercise in 2012’.
V njem je bilo navedeno tudi, da bi usklajen pristop h kriznemu sodelovanju med različnimi elementi kibernetskega ekosistema, ki bi bil določen v „načrtu“, izboljšal pripravljenost ter da bi ta načrt prav tako moral omogočiti sinergije in povezanost z obstoječimi mehanizmi kriznega upravljanja.
The 2016 Communication ‘Strengthening Europe's Cyber Resilience System and Fostering a Competitive and Innovative Cybersecurity Industry’ [2] encouraged Member States to make the most out of the NIS Directive [3] cooperation mechanisms and to enhance cross-border cooperation related to preparedness for a large-scale cyber incident.
V sklepih Sveta [4] v zvezi z navedenim sporočilom so države članice pozvale Komisijo, naj takšen načrt predloži v obravnavo organom in drugim zadevnim deležnikom.
It added that a coordinated approach to crisis cooperation across the various elements of the cyber ecosystem to be set out in a ‘blueprint’ would increase preparedness and that such a blueprint should also ensure synergies and coherence with existing crisis management mechanisms.
Vendar direktiva VOI ne določa okvira Unije za sodelovanje v primeru velikih kibernetskih incidentov in kriz.
In the Council Conclusions [4] on the aforementioned Communication, Member States called on the Commission to submit such a blueprint for consideration by the bodies and other relevant stakeholders.
Komisija se je posvetovala z državami članicami na dveh ločenih posvetovalnih delavnicah, ki sta potekali 5. aprila in 4. julija 2017 v Bruslju, udeležili pa so se jih predstavniki skupin za odzivanje na incidente na področju računalniške varnosti (CSIRT) držav članic, skupine za sodelovanje, vzpostavljene z direktivo VOI, in Horizontalne delovne skupine Sveta za kibernetska vprašanja ter predstavniki Evropske službe za zunanje delovanje (ESZD), agencije ENISA, Europola/EC3 in generalnega sekretariata Sveta (GSS).
However the NIS Directive does not provide for a Union cooperation framework in case of large-scale cybersecurity incidents and crises.
Sedanji načrt za usklajen odziv na velike kibernetske incidente in krize na ravni Unije, ki je priložen temu priporočilu, je rezultat omenjenih posvetovanj in dopolnjuje sporočilo o krepitvi odpornosti evropskega sistema kibernetske varnosti ter spodbujanju konkurenčne in inovativne industrije kibernetske varnosti.
The Commission, consulted with Member States in two separate consultation workshops held in Brussels on 5 April and 4 July 2017 with Member States representatives from Computer Security Incident Response Teams (CSIRTs), the Cooperation Group established by the NIS Directive and the Council Horizontal Working Party on Cyber Issues as well as representatives from the European External Action Service (EEAS), ENISA, Europol/EC3 and the General Secretariat of the Council (GSC).
Načrt opisuje in določa cilje in načine sodelovanja med državami članicami ter institucijami, organi, uradi in agencijami EU (v nadaljnjem besedilu: institucije EU) pri odzivanju na velike kibernetske incidente in krize ter prikazuje, kako lahko obstoječi mehanizmi za krizno upravljanje v celoti izkoristijo obstoječe subjekte za zagotavljanje kibernetske varnosti na ravni EU.