natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Kako bi lahko Komisija s okviru svojih pristojnosti najbolje podprla ustanovitev tovrstnih sodišč?
How, within its competences, can the Commission best support the creation of such courts?
Katere konkretne ukrepe bo sprejela?
What concrete measures will it adopt?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0074/09
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0074/09
Zadeva: Svoboda tiska in izražanja v Turčiji (državi kandidatki za vstop v EU)
Subject: Freedom of the press and freedom of expression in Turkey (Candidate for accession to the EU)
Glede na ta razvoj, Svet sprašujem:
In view of this, can the Council provide the following information:
Če da, s katerimi?
If so, what information does it have?
Predsedniki oz. pristojni v vladi so preklicali novinarske akreditacije kritičnih novinarjev in sprožili tožbe proti kritičnim publikacijam (1) (5)
a) The cancellation of press accreditation from critical journalists by the Prime Minister or officials in the Prime Minister’s office and legal actions against critical publications 1, 5
Kritičnim novinarjem in založnikom, naj bi bila deloma neupravičeno odvzeta prostost med postopkom preiskav proti kriminalni združbi Ergenekon (2) (5)
b) The arrest of critical journalists and publishers, some of which were allegedly unjustified, as part of the investigation of the illegal Ergenekon Network 2, 5
Prišlo je do prevzema nadzora nad medijsko hišo ATV-Sabah leta 2008 prek njene prodaje družbi Calik Holding, ki jo vodi zet predsednika vlade, prodajo pa so financirale državne banke (3)
c) Transfer of control over the ATV-Sabah 2008 media group through its acquisition by Calik Holding, which is run by the Prime Minister’s son-in-law and co-funded by State banks 3
Predsednik vlade je javno pozival k bojkotu novinarjev in publikacij (4) (5)
d) Public statements by the Prime Minister calling for the boycotting of journalists and publications 4, 5
Ozadje obsodbe medijske hiše Dogan na denarno kazen v višini 500 milijonov dolarjev zaradi zamujenega plačila davkov (sodba s 16. februarja 2009), tudi v zvezi s poročili o vladnem nadzoru in pozivi vlade k bojkotu te medijske hiše.
e) The circumstances surrounding the fine of $500 million imposed on the Dogan Media group for late payment of taxes (judgment of 16 February 2009) together with reports that the government is attempting to manipulate the media group and is calling for a boycott against it 6 .
Ali je Svet po objavi poročila o napredku bolj zaskrbljen glede svobode tiska in izražanja v Turčiji kot pred njegovo objavo?
Is the Council more or less concerned at the situation regarding freedom of expression and freedom of the press in Turkey than at the date of publication of the progress report?
Kako pomembna je tema svobode tiska in izražanja pri pristopnih pogajanjih v teku?
What importance is being attached to ‘freedom of the press and freedom of expression’ in the context of the current accession negotiations?
Spletni viri od 1 do 5 so bili pregledani 18. marca, vir 6 pa 2 aprila:
Sources 1 to 5 and Source 6 were accessed on line on 18 March and 2 April respectively:
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0075/09
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0075/09
Glede na ta razvoj, Komisijo sprašujem:
In view of this, can the Commission provide the following information:
Ali je Komisija seznanjena z navedenimi incidenti v Turčiji?
Does the Commission have information concerning the following incidents in Turkey?
a) Predsedniki oz. pristojni v vladi so preklicali novinarske akreditacije kritičnih novinarjev in sprožili tožbe proti kritičnim publikacijam (1) (5)
a) The cancellation of press accreditation from critical journalists by the Prime Minister or officials in the Prime Minister’s office and legal actions against critical publications 1, 5
b) Kritičnim novinarjem in založnikom, naj bi bila deloma neupravičeno odvzeta prostost med postopkom preiskav proti kriminalni združbi Ergenekon (2) (5)
b) The arrest of critical journalists and publishers, some of which were allegedly unjustified, as part of the investigation of the illegal Ergenekon Network 2, 5
c) Prišlo je do prevzema nadzora nad medijsko hišo ATV-Sabah leta 2008 prek njene prodaje družbi Calik Holding, ki jo vodi zet predsednika vlade, prodajo pa so financirale državne banke (3)
c) Transfer of control over the ATV-Sabah 2008 media group through its acquisition by Calik Holding, which is run by the Prime Minister’s son-in-law and co-funded by State banks 3
d) Predsednik vlade je javno pozival k bojkotu novinarjev in publikacij (4) (5)
d) Public statements by the Prime Minister calling for the boycotting of journalists and publications 4, 5
Ali je Komisija po objavi poročila o napredku bolj zaskrbljena glede svobode tiska in izražanja v Turčiji kot pred njegovo objavo?
Is the Commission more or less concerned at the situation regarding freedom of expression and freedom of the press in Turkey than at the date of publication of the progress report?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0076/09/rev.1
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0076/09/rev.1
Zadeva: predlog direktive o pravicah potrošnikov
Subject: Proposal for a Directive on Consumer Rights
Odbor IMCO podpira cilje iz predloga direktive o pravicah potrošnikov (KOM(2008)0614), in sicer da je treba povečati zaupanje potrošnikov in zmanjšati ovire za čezmejno trgovanje ter s tem prispevati k boljšemu delovanju notranjega trga.
The IMCO Committee supports the objectives of the proposal for a Directive on Consumer Rights (COM(2008)0614), namely to contribute to the better functioning of the internal market by enhancing consumer confidence and reducing obstacles to cross-border trade.
Pozdravlja cilj, ki je naveden že v resoluciji Evropskega parlamenta s 6. septembra 2007 ( P6_TA(2007)0383 ), da je treba posodobiti, poenostaviti in izboljšati sistem predpisov za potrošnike in podjetja na notranjem trgu.
As stated in the European Parliament resolution of 6 September 2007 ( P6_TA(2007)0383 ), the Committee welcomes the goal of modernising, simplifying and improving the regulatory regime for consumers and businesses in the internal market.
Vseeno pa se zaveda zadržkov, ki so jih zainteresirane strani izrazile glede praktičnih posledic tega predloga.
The Committee does however recognise the concerns expressed by stakeholders regarding the practical implications of the current proposal.
Meni, da jih je treba obravnavati v celoti, in na Evropsko komisijo naslavlja naslednja vprašanja:
The Committee believes it is important to fully address these concerns and asks the European Commission:
Ali bo Komisija sodelovala z državami članicami glede praktičnih učinkov predloga na nacionalni ravni?
Will the Commission undertake to work with the Member States on the practical effects of the proposal at national level?
Ali Komisija lahko pojasni medsebojno povezavo med usklajenimi pravili iz predloga in elementi nacionalnega splošnega pogodbenega prava, ki veljajo za potrošnike (na primer pravna sredstva, ki vključujejo pravico do zavrnitve blaga z napako v Združenem kraljestvu in garancije za skrite napake v Franciji in/ali Belgiji)?
Can the Commission clarify the interaction between the harmonised rules in the proposal and elements of national general contract law which apply to consumers (such as remedies including the right to reject faulty goods in the UK and the latent defect guarantee rules in France or in Belgium)?
Ali Komisija lahko pojasni medsebojni vpliv osnutka predloga in osnutka skupnega referenčnega okvira ter obstoječe zakonodaje Skupnosti, zlasti direktive o nepoštenih poslovnih praksah, direktive o e-poslovanju, direktive o storitvah in uredbe Rim I?
Could the Commission clarify the interplay of the draft proposal with the draft CFR and with existing Community legislation, in particular the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, e-commerce Directive, Services Directive and the Rome I Regulation?
Ali namerava Komisija pripraviti poglobljeno oceno učinka, da bodo na voljo jasno razvidne prednosti in stroški tega predloga ter alternative zanj, vključno z vidika te dodatne ocene?
Will the Commission undertake further work on the impact assessment to clearly demonstrate the benefits and costs of this proposal and its alternatives, including in light of the above work?
Ali bo Komisija obvestila Parlament o prihodnjih korakih za nadaljevanje dialoga med organizacijami potrošnikov in podjetij glede tega predloga?
Will the Commission inform the Parliament of steps the Commission will take to support further dialogue between consumer and business organisations regarding this proposal?
UL C 187 E, 24.7.2008, str.
OJ C 187 E, 24.7.2008, p.
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0077/09
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0077/09
v skladu s členom 115 Poslovnika
pursuant to Rule 115 of the Rules of Procedure
Zadeva: Zakon o prekinitvi sojenj v kazenskih zadevah v Italiji
Subject: Law on the suspension of criminal trials in Italy
Italijanski parlament je 22. julija 2008 sprejel, predsednik republike pa podpisal zakon 124/08 (Lodo Alfano) o „prekinitvi sojenj v kazenskih zadevah proti visokim državnim funkcionarjem“, ki ga je predlagala vlada premierja Berlusconija.
The Italian law 124/08 (Lodo Alfano) on the ‘suspension of criminal trials against high offices of the State’, proposed by the Berlusconi government, was approved by the Italian Parliament on 22 July 2008 and signed by the President of the Republic.
Zakon določa, da se sojenja v kazenskih zadevah proti predsednikom republike, senata, poslanske zbornice in vlade prekinejo za čas trajanja njihovega mandata.
The law foresees that criminal trials against the Presidents of the Republic, of the Senate, of the Chamber of Representatives and of the Council of Ministers are suspended during their term of office.
Prekinitev zajema tudi kazniva dejanja, ki niso bila storjena v okviru uradne funkcije ali so bila storjena pred prevzemom uradne funkcije in celo, če je bil storilec zaloten pri storitvi kaznivega dejanja.
The suspension also covers crimes committed outside of the functions of office, or before assuming office, and even if caught in the act.
Italija je edina država v EU, v kateri ima predsednik vlade ad hoc imuniteto pred kakršnim koli kazenskim pregonom.
Italy is the only country in the EU to grant to the President of the Council of Ministers ad hoc immunity from any criminal prosecution.
Podobno določbo je ustavno sodišče že razveljavilo, o skladnosti zakona z ustavo pa bo presojalo predvidoma 6. oktobra 2009, in sicer na zahtevo milanskega tožilca, ki preiskuje zadevo David Mills in televizijske pravice podjetja Mediaset, v kateri je obtožen Silvio Berlusconi.
A similar provision had already been abrogated by the Constitutional Court, which is expected to rule on the conformity of the law with the Constitution on 6 October 2009 at the request of the Milan prosecutor investigating the David Mills and Mediaset television rights cases, in which Berlusconi is accused.
V povezavi s tem je bil Berlusconi na večerji z dvema sodnikoma ustavnega sodišča ter pravosodnim ministrom, državnim sekretarjem v uradu predsednika vlade in predsednikom odbora senata za ustavne zadeve.
In this context, Berlusconi had a dinner with two Constitutional Court judges, together with the Minister of Justice, the Undersecretary of the Council Presidency and the President of the Constitutional Affairs of the Senate.
Ali je Svet seznanjen s temi dejstvi?
Is the Council aware of these facts?
Ali Svet meni, da je italijanski zakon skladen s človekovimi pravicami in temeljnimi svoboščinami, demokracijo in pravno državo, kot jih zagotavljajo Listina o temeljnih pravicah ter člena 6 in 7 Pogodbe o EU, med drugim s temeljno pravico državljanov do enakosti pred zakonom?
Does the Council think that the Italian law is in conformity with human rights and fundamental freedoms, democracy and the rule of law, as guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights and by Articles 6 and 7 TEU, inter alia with the fundamental right of citizens to be equal before the law?
Ali Svet meni, da je skladno z evropskimi in demokratičnimi načeli, da izvršna oblast javno in silovito napada sodstvo ter da poskuša vplivati na ustavno sodišče nekaj mesecev, preden bo moralo to razsojati v tako pomembni zadevi, ki neposredno zadeva interese predsednika vlade?
Does the Council consider that it is in conformity with European and democratic principles for the executive to publicly and vehemently attack the judiciary and to try to influence the Constitutional Court a few months before it is called to express itself on such a relevant issue touching upon direct interests of the Prime Minister?
Kakšne konkretne ukrepe bo v zvezi s tem sprejel Svet, da bi zagotovil spoštovanje temeljnih pravic, demokracije in pravne države, ki jih zagotavljajo pogodbe EU in italijanska ustava?
What concrete actions will the Council take in this regard, so to ensure that fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law, guaranteed by EU Treaties and by the Italian Constitution, are respected?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0078/09
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0078/09
Italijanski parlament je 22. julija 2008 sprejel, predsednik republike pa podpisal zakon 124/08 (Lodo Alfano) o „prekinitvi sojenj v kazenskih zadevah proti visokim državnim funkcionarjem“, ki ga je predlagala vlada premierja Berlusconija.
The Italian law 124/08 (Lodo Alfano) on the "suspension of criminal trials against high offices of the State", proposed by the Berlusconi government, was approved by the Italian Parliament on 22 July 2008 and signed by the President of the Republic.
Zakon določa, da se sojenja v kazenskih zadevah proti predsednikom republike, senata, poslanske zbornice in vlade prekinejo za čas trajanja njihovega mandata.
The law provides that criminal trials against the Presidents of the Republic, of the Senate, of the Chamber of Representatives and of the Council of Ministers are to be suspended during their term of office.
Prekinitev zajema tudi kazniva dejanja, ki niso bila storjena v okviru uradne funkcije ali so bila storjena pred prevzemom uradne funkcije in celo, če je bil storilec zaloten pri storitvi kaznivega dejanja.
The suspension covers also crimes committed outside the functions of office, or before assuming office, and even if caught in the act.
Podobno določbo je ustavno sodišče že razveljavilo, o skladnosti zakona z ustavo pa bo presojalo predvidoma 6. oktobra 2009, in sicer na zahtevo milanskega tožilca, ki preiskuje zadevo David Mills in televizijske pravice podjetja Mediaset, v kateri je obtožen Silvio Berlusconi.
A similar provision had already been abrogated by the Constitutional Court, which is expected to judge on the compliance of the law with the Constitution on 6 October 2009 at the request of the Milan investigating prosecutor in the David Mills trial and the investigation concerning Mediaset television rights, in connection with which Berlusconi has been charged.
V povezavi s tem je bil Berlusconi na večerji z dvema sodnikoma ustavnega sodišča, skupaj s pravosodnim ministrom, državnim sekretarjem v uradu predsednika vlade in predsednikom odbora senata za ustavne zadeve.
Against this background, Berlusconi has had dinner with two Constitutional Court judges, together with the Minister of Justice, the Undersecretary of the Council Presidency and the President of the Constitutional Affairs of the Senate.
Ali je Komisija seznanjena s temi dejstvi?
Is the Commission aware of these facts?
Ali Komisija meni, da je italijanski zakon skladen s človekovimi pravicami in temeljnimi svoboščinami, demokracijo in pravno državo, kot jih zagotavljajo Listina o temeljnih pravicah ter člena 6 in 7 Pogodbe o EU, med drugim s temeljno pravico državljanov do enakosti pred zakonom?
Does the Commission think that Italian law complies with human rights and fundamental freedoms, democracy and the rule of law as guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights and by Articles 6 and 7 TEU, inter alia, and with the fundamental right of citizens to be equal before the law?
Ali Komisija meni, da je skladno z evropskimi in demokratičnimi načeli, da izvršna oblast javno in silovito napada sodstvo ter da poskuša vplivati na ustavno sodišče nekaj mesecev, preden bo moralo to razsojati v tako pomembni zadevi, ki neposredno zadeva interese predsednika vlade?
Does the Commission consider that it is in accordance with European and democratic principles for the executive to publicly and vehemently attack the judiciary and to try to influence the Constitutional Court a few months before it is required to rule on such an important issue which affects the direct interests of the Prime Minister?
Kakšne konkretne ukrepe bo v zvezi s tem sprejela Komisija, da bi zagotovila spoštovanje temeljnih pravic, demokracije in pravne države, ki jih zagotavljajo pogodbe EU in italijanska ustava?
What specific actions will the Commission take in this regard, so as to ensure that fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law, as enshrined in the EU Treaties and the Italian Constitution, are respected?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0079/09
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0079/09
Zadeva: Litovski zakon za zaščito mladoletnikov pred škodljivimi učinki javnega obveščanja
Subject: Lithuanian Law for the Protection of Minors against the Detrimental Effects of Public Information
Litovski parlament je 14. julija 2009 sprejel spremembe zakona o zaščiti mladoletnikov pred škodljivimi učinki javnega obveščanja.
On 14 July 2009 the Lithuanian Parliament approved amendments to the Law on the Protection of Minors against the Detrimental Effects of Public Information.
V zakonu je navedeno, da „javno obveščanje, ki napeljuje k homoseksualnim odnosom,“ povzroča „škodljive posledice za razvoj mladoletnikov“ ter da „je v nasprotju z družinskimi vrednotami“.
The law asserts that ‘a detrimental effect on the development of minors’ is caused by ‘public information that agitates for homosexual relations’ and that ‘defies family values’.
Takšna določba informacije o homoseksualnosti izenačuje z zadevami, kot so prikazovanje fizičnega nasilja, razkazovanje kruto pohabljenega telesa osebe in informacijami, ki spodbujajo samopohabljanje ali samomor.
Such a provision puts information about homosexuality on a par with issues such as the portrayal of physical violence, the display of a cruelly mutilated human body and information that encourages self-mutilation or suicide.
Zakon vodi k prepovedi vsega informiranja o homoseksualnosti, če bi to utegnilo biti dostopno mladoletnim.
The law results in the banning of any information on homosexuality if it can be accessed by minors.
Litovski predsednik je podal veto na ta zakon, zaradi posplošitev in nejasnosti, ki jih vsebuje, ter zaprosil parlament, naj ga ponovno obravnava in zagotovi njegovo skladnost „z ustavnimi načeli pravne države, pravne varnosti in pravne jasnosti ter da ni v nasprotju z jamstvi odprte družbe in pluralistične demokracije“.
The President of Lithuania vetoed the law, as it was drafted in vague and unclear terms, and asked the Parliament to reconsider it to ensure that it complied with ‘the constitutional principles of the rule of law, legal certainty, and legal clarity’ and was ‘not in conflict with the guarantees of an open society and pluralistic democracy’.
Nevladne organizacije za človekove pravice in poslanci Evropskega parlamenta so večkrat pozvali institucije EU k posredovanju in litovski parlament (Seimas) k reviziji osnutka zakona, vložena pa bo tudi pritožba na ustavnemu sodišču.
Human Rights NGOs and MEPs have repeatedly called on EU institutions to intervene and the Seimas to review the draft law, while an appeal will be filed with the Constitutional Court.
Poleg tega bodo jeseni obravnavani predlogi sprememb kazenskega in upravnega zakonika, s katerimi dejanja fizičnih ali pravnih oseb, ki „propagirajo homoseksualnost“ na javnih mestih, postanejo kazniva dejanja, ki se kaznujejo bodisi z javnim delom bodisi z globo v višini do 1500 EUR ali z odvzemom prostosti.
Furthermore, amendments to the penal and administrative codes which criminalize acts by private or legal persons ‘propagating homosexuality’ in public areas to be punished either by public works, or by a fine of up to 1 500 Euros, or by arrest, will be examined in the autumn.
Ali je Svet razpravljal z litovskimi oblastmi o omenjenih zadevah?
Has the Council discussed the above-mentioned issues with the Lithuanian authorities?
Ali ni mnenje Sveta, da takšen zakon in predlogi sprememb niso v skladu s človekovimi pravicami in temeljnimi svoboščinami, kot so zapisane v mednarodnih in evropskih konvencijah, ter še zlasti s svobodo izražanja, ki vključuje pravico do iskanja, sprejemanja in širjenja informacij, ter da niso skladni s protidiskriminacijsko zakonodajo in politiko EU?
Does the Council not think that such a law and such amendments are incompatible with human rights and fundamental freedoms as enshrined in international and European conventions and notably with freedom of expression, which includes the right to seek, receive and impart information, and that it is incompatible with EU law and policies on anti-discrimination?
Ali se Svetu ne zdi, da je takšen zakon v nasprotju z Listino EU o temeljnih pravicah, s členom 6 Pogodbe o EU in členom 13 Pogodbe o ES, torej s temeljnimi vrednotami, na katerih temelji EU?
Does the Council not think that such a law contravenes the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, Article 6 TEU and Article 13 TEC, i.e. the fundamental values on which the EU is based?
Ali bo Svet zahteval, da Agencija za temeljne pravice oceni ta zakon in predloge za njegovo spremembo?
Will the Council ask the Fundamental Rights Agency to assess the law and the amendments?
Kaj bo storil Svet, da bi zagotovil, da bo Litva spoštovala svoje obveznosti iz pogodb o EU, evropskega in mednarodnega prava?
What will the Council do to ensure that Lithuania respects its obligations under the EU Treaties, European and international law?
Ali je pripravljen sprožiti postopek iz člena 7 Pogodbe o EU, če bo to potrebno?
Is it ready to activate the procedure provided for in Article 7 TEU if necessary?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0080/09
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0080/09
Zadeva: Litvanski zakon za zaščito mladoletnikov pred škodljivimi učinki javnega obveščanja
Subject: Lithuanian Law for the Protection of Minors against the Detrimental Effects of Public Information
Ali je Komisija razpravljala z litovskimi oblastmi o omenjenih zadevah?
Has the Commission discussed the above-mentioned issues with the Lithuanian authorities?
Ali ni mnenje Komisije, da takšen zakon in predlogi sprememb niso v skladu s človekovimi pravicami in temeljnimi svoboščinami, kot so zapisane v mednarodnih in evropskih konvencijah, ter še zlasti s svobodo izražanja, ki vključuje pravico do iskanja, sprejemanja in širjenja informacij, ter da niso skladni s protidiskriminacijsko zakonodajo in politiko EU?
Does the Commission not think that such a law and such amendments are incompatible with human rights and fundamental freedoms as enshrined in international and European conventions and notably with freedom of expression, which includes the right to seek, receive and impart information, and that it is incompatible with EU law and policies on anti-discrimination?
Ali se Komisiji ne zdi, da je takšen zakon v nasprotju z Listino EU o temeljnih pravicah, s členom 6 Pogodbe o EU in členom 13 Pogodbe o ES, torej s temeljnimi vrednotami, na katerih temelji EU?
Does the Commission not think that such a law contravenes the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, Article 6 TEU and Article 13 TEC, i.e. the fundamental values on which the EU is based?
Ali bo Komisija zahtevala, da Agencija za temeljne pravice oceni ta zakon in predloge za njegovo spremembo?
Will the Commission ask the Fundamental Rights Agency to assess the law and the amendments?
Kaj bo storila Komisija, da bi zagotovila, da bo Litva spoštovala svoje obveznosti iz pogodb o EU, evropskega in mednarodnega prava?
What will the Commission do to ensure that Lithuania respects its obligations under the EU Treaties, European and international law?
Ali je pripravljena sprožiti postopek iz člena 7 Pogodbe o EU, če bo to potrebno?
Is it ready to activate the procedure provided for in Article 7 TEU if necessary?
VPRAŠANJE ZA USTNI ODGOVOR Z RAZPRAVO O-0081/09
ORAL QUESTION WITH DEBATE O-0081/09