natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
B. ker Bogdan Golik na ozemlju držav članic, ki niso njegova država, uživa imuniteto pred kakršnim koli ukrepom ali priporom in sodnim postopkom po členu 10 Protokola o privilegijih in imunitetah Evropskih skupnosti z dne 8. aprila 1965,
B. whereas Bogdan Golik enjoys, in the territory of Member States other than his own, immunity from any measure of detention and from legal proceedings under Article 10 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities of 8 April 1965,
C. ker je Bogdan Golik, skladno z zgoraj omenjeno sodno prakso Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti v kritičnem času užival imuniteto, saj je Parlament zasedal,
C. whereas Bogdan Golik enjoyed that immunity at the material time since Parliament was in session, in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice cited above,
Na zasedanju dne 4. septembra 2006 je predsednik Parlamenta obvestil zbor, da je prejel pismo belgijskega ministrstva za zunanje zadeve, kateremu je bila priložena zahteva urada tožilca pri Višjem sodišču v Bruslju, da se Bogdanu Goliku odvzame poslanska imuniteta.
At the sitting of 4 September 2006, the President of Parliament informed the House that he had received a letter from the Belgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs enclosing a request from the Prosecutor's Office at the Court of Appeal, Brussels, for the waiver of the parliamentary immunity of Bogdan Golik.
Skladno s členom 6(2) poslovnika je predsednik zahtevo posredoval Odboru za pravne zadeve.
In accordance with Rule 6(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the President referred the request to the Committee on Legal Affairs.
Državni tožilec je pri Višjem sodišču v Bruslju vložil zahtevo po odvzemu imunitete.
The request for waiver of immunity was made by the Public Prosecutor at the Court of Appeal, Brussels.
Ministrstvo za zunanje zadeve Kraljevine Belgije, ki je pristojni organ po členu 7(7) poslovnika, je zahtevo predložilo Parlamentu.
The request was submitted to Parliament by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Belgium, which constitutes a competent authority within the meaning of Rule 7 (7) of the Rules of Procedure.
Državni tožilec je zahteval odvzem poslanske imunitete Bogdana Golika, da bi lahko raziskal prijavo, ki je bila vložena, in, če bi bilo to primerno, začel postopek pred pristojnim kazenskim sodiščem, zaradi obtožbe posilstva ali morebiti kakšne druge obtožbe, do katerih bi lahko navedbe v zvezi z Bogdanom Golikom pripeljale.
The Public Prosecutor has requested the waiver of Mr Golik's parliamentary immunity in order to enable an investigation to be carried out of a complaint and, if appropriate, to bring proceedings in the competent criminal courts on a charge of rape or such other charge, if any, to which the allegations made against Mr Golik may give rise.
Podrobnosti o prijavi v zvezi z Bogdanom Golikom so obrazložene v obvestilu 22/2006, ki je bilo posredovano članom pristojnega odbora.
Details of the complaint made against Mr Golik are set out in Notice 22/2006, which has been circulated amongst the members of the competent committee.
POSLANSKA IMUNITETA POSLANCEV EVROPSKEGA PARLAMENTA: BESEDILA IN NAČELA
PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY OF MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: TEXTS AND PRINCIPLES
Člen 10 Protokola o privilegijih in imunitetah Evropskih skupnosti
Article 10 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities(
() Glej tudi člen 9 tega protokola: "Zoper člana Skupščine se ne sme začeti preiskava, ne sme biti priprt niti se zoper njega ne sme začeti sodni postopek zaradi mnenja ali glasu, ki ga je izrekel pri opravljanju svojih dolžnosti." , ki je priloga k Pogodbi o ustanovitvi enotnega Sveta in enotne Komisije Evropskih skupnosti
() See also Article 9 of this Protocol: 'Members of the European Parliament shall not be subject to any form of inquiry, detention or legal proceedings in respect of opinions expressed or votes cast by them in the performance of their duties.' ), annexed to the Treaty establishing a Single Council and a Single Commission of the European Communities(
()Na to se sklicuje člen 4(2) Akta o volitvah poslancev Evropskega parlamenta s splošnimi neposrednimi volitvami z dne 20. septembra 1976. , in ki vključuje določbe člena 9 vsakega od protokolov, ki so priloge Pogodbam o ustanovitvi ESPJ, EGS in ESJE, določa:
()Referred to in Article 4(2) of the Act concerning the election of representatives of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage of 20 September 1976. ), which incorporates the provisions of Article 9 of each of the protocols annexed to the Treaties establishing the ECSC, the EEC and the EAEC, reads as follows:
a) na ozemlju svoje države imunitete, priznane članom parlamenta te države;
(a) in the territory of their own State, the immunities accorded to members of their parliament;
b) na ozemlju vseh drugih držav članic imuniteto pred kakršnim koli priporom in sodnim postopkom.
(b) in the territory of any other Member States, immunity from any measure of detention and from legal proceedings.
Prijava, vložena zoper Bogdana Golik, poljskega poslanca, zadeva dogodke, ki naj bi se zgodili na ozemlju Kraljevine Belgije.
The complaint laid against Mr Bogdan Golik, a Polish MEP, relates to events that allegedly took place within the territory of the Kingdom of Belgium.
V skladu s členom 10(1)(b) protokola, Bogdan Golik med zasedanjem parlamenta na ozemlju držav članic, ki niso njegova država, uživa imuniteto pred kakršnim koli ukrepom ali priporom in sodnim postopkom.
In accordance with point (b) of the first paragraph of Article 10 of the Protocol, during the sessions of the European Parliament, Mr Golik enjoys immunity from any measure of detention and from legal proceedings in the territory of Member States other than his own.
Dogodki, na katere se nanaša prijava, naj bi se odvijali v noči s 6. na 7. december 2005.
The events to which the complaint relates allegedly took place during the night of 6 to 7 December 2005.
V skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča Evropskih skupnosti, je treba za namene protokola o privilegijih in imunitetah "[je treba] šteti, da Evropski parlament zaseda, čeprav zasedanje dejansko ne poteka, dokler ni sprejet sklep, ki zaključuje njegovo letno ali izredno zasedanje"
According to the case-law of the Court of Justice, for the purposes of the Protocol on Privileges and Immunities, "the European Parliament must be considered to be in session, even if is not actually sitting, until the decision is taken closing its annual or extraordinary sessions"
Torej je Bogdan Golik v kritičnem trenutku užival imuniteto po členu 10 protokola.
Consequently, Mr Golik enjoyed immunity under Article 10 of the Protocol at the material time.
Poslanska imuniteta ni osebni privilegij poslancev, temveč jamstvo za neodvisnost Parlamenta in njegovih poslancev v odnosu do drugih organov.
Parliamentary immunity is not a Member's personal privilege, but a guarantee of the independence of Parliament and its Members in relation to other authorities.
Na temelju tega načela datum, ko naj bi se domnevni dogodek zgodil, ni pomemben, in je lahko pred izvolitvijo poslanca ali za tem, saj je pomembna le zaščita Parlamenta prek njegovih poslancev.
On the basis of this principle, the date on which the alleged acts took place is of no importance and may be either prior to or subsequent to the election of the Member, since protection of Parliament through its Members is the sole consideration.
Nadalje, iz samega namena poslanske imunitete izhaja, da bi ta morala učinkovati ves čas mandata poslanca, in zajemati začetek postopkov, preiskovalni postopek, ukrepe za izvršitev že obstoječih sodb, postopek s pritožbo in izdajanje sodb.
Furthermore, it stems from the very purpose of parliamentary immunity that the latter should remain effective throughout a Member's term of office and cover the commencement of the proceedings, preparatory inquiries, measures for the execution of pre-existing judgments, appeals and applications for judgments to be set aside.
Postopek v Evropskem parlamentu urejata člena 6 in 7 poslovnika.
The procedure to be followed by the European Parliament is laid down in Rules 6 and 7 of the Rules of Procedure.
RAZLOGI ZA PREDLOG SKLEPA
III GROUNDS FOR THE PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION
Člena 9 protokola o privilegijih in imunitetah očitno v tem primeru ni mogoče uporabiti.
Article 9 of the PPI obviously does not apply in this case.
Absolutna imuniteta velja le za "mnenja ali glas, ki ga je (poslanec) izrekel pri opravljanju svojih dolžnosti."
Absolute immunity applies only "to opinions or votes cast by (Members) in the performance of their duties".
Kot je bilo že pojasnjeno v razdelku II, se uporabi člen 10(1)(b) protokola in je možno vprašanjem, ki jih državni tožilec postavlja v svoji zahtevi, odgovoriti, kot sledi:
As has already been made clear in section II, Article 10, first paragraph, point (b), of the Protocol applies and the questions raised by the State Prosecutor in her request for waiver may be answered as follows:
a) Bogdan Golik je 6. in 7. decembra 2005 v Belgiji užival imuniteto po členu 10(b) protokola;
(a) Mr Golik enjoyed immunity under Article 10(b) of the Protocol in Belgium on 6-7 December 2005;
b) Bogdan Golik kot poslanec Evropskega parlamenta še vedno uživa imuniteto v skladu s protokolom.
(b) Mr Golik continues to enjoy immunity under the Protocol as a Member of the European Parliament.
Ni dejavnikov, ki bi kazali na to, da gre v tem primeru za fumus persecutionis.
There is no suggestion that a fumus persecutionis exists in this case.
Bogdan Golik je predlagal, naj se mu imuniteta odvzame, v interesu Parlamenta pa je, da se prijavo razišče in, če je to primerno, tudi preveri na sodišču.
Mr Golik has asked that his immunity be waived and it is in the interest of Parliament that the complaint be investigated and, if appropriate, tested in court.
Člen 7(4) poslovnika določa, da je izjemoma lahko v poročilu odbora predlagano, naj odvzem imunitete velja le za kazenski pregon ter da do pravnomočnosti sodbe poslancu ni mogoče odvzeti prostosti ali ga zapreti ali zoper njega uvesti ukrepe, ki mu onemogočajo izvrševanje nalog iz njegovega mandata.
Rule 7(4) of the Rules of Procedure provides that the report of the committee responsible may, exceptionally, propose that, until a final sentence is passed, the Member should be immune from any form of detention or remand or any other measure which prevents him from performing the duties proper to his mandate.
Na osnovi zgornjih preudarkov in v skladu s členoma 7(1) (2) poslovnika ter po preučitvi razlogov za in proti odvzemu poslančeve imunitete, Odbor za pravne zadeve priporoča, da Evropski parlament Bogdanu Goliku odvzame poslansko imuniteto, ob upoštevanju določb iz člena 7(4).
In the light of the above considerations and pursuant to Rule 7(1) and (2) of the Rules of Procedure, the Committee on Legal Affairs, having considered the arguments for and against waiving immunity, recommends that Parliament should waive Mr Bogdan Golik's parliamentary immunity , subject to the provisions of Rule 7(4).
Zahteva za odvzem imunitete vložil* Datum zahteve Datum razglasitve na zasedanju * Podatki so na voljo samo v enem jeziku.
Request for waiver from* Date of request Date announced in plenary *In one language only
Belgijsko Ministrstvo za zunanje zadeve 7.7.2006 4.9.2006
Belgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs 7.7.2006 4.9.2006
o predlogu direktive Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o zavajajočem in primerjalnem oglaševanju (kodificirana različica)
on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning misleading and comparative advertising (Codified version)
(Poenostavljeni postopek - kodifikacija - člen 80 in člen 43 Poslovnika)
(Simplified procedure - Codification - Rules 80 and 43 of the Rules of Procedure)
(Postopek soodločanja: prva obravnava)
(Codecision procedure - Codification)
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu ( KOM(2006)0222 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council ( COM(2006)0222 )
– ob upoštevanju člena 95 Pogodbe ES, na podlagi katerega je Komisija Parlamentu podala predlog ( C6–0161/2006 ),
– having regard to Article 95 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament ( C6‑0161/2006 ),
– ob upoštevanju medinstitucionalnega sporazuma z dne 20. decembra 1994 o pospešenem delovnem postopku za uradno kodifikacijo zakonodajnih besedil
– having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 - Accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts
– ob upoštevanju členov 80, 51 in 43 Poslovnika,
– having regard to Rules 80, 51 and 43 of its Rules of Procedure,
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve ( A6–0318/2006 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A6‑0318/2006 ),
Predlog direktive Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o zavajajočem in primerjalnem oglaševanju (kodificirana različica)
Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning misleading and comparative advertising (Codified version)
o predlogu Uredbe Sveta, ki spreminja Uredbo (ES) št. 1698/2005 o podpori za razvoj podeželja iz Evropskega kmetijskega sklada za razvoj podeželja (EAFRD)
on the proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Svetu ( KOM(2006)0237 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council ( COM(2006)0237 )
– ob upoštevanju člena 37 pogodbe ES, v skladu s katerim se je Svet posvetoval s Parlamentom ( C6-0237/2006 ),
– having regard to Article 37 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament ( C6‑0237/2006 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja ( A6-0399/2006 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development ( A6‑0399/2006 ),
EKSRP - december 2005 Finančni sporazum
EAFRD - December 2005 Financing Agreement
Vsa plačila za razvoj podeželja od 2007–2013 bodo izplačana iz Evropskega kmetijskega sklada za razvoj podeželja (EKSRP) - sklada, ki bo nadomestil dva trenutna vira financiranja (EKUJS - usmerjevalni in jamstveni sklad).
All rural development payments from 2007 - 2013 will be made out of the EAFRD (European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development) – the single fund which will replace the two current sources of rural development funding (the EAGGF Guarantee and Guidance funds).
Finančni sporazum, sprejet na zasedanju Sveta decembra 2005, določa nekaj parametrov za celoten sklad za razvoj podeželja, ki bo pred modulacijo vseboval 69,75 milijard evrov.
The December 2005 European Council financing agreement did agree certain parameters for the overall Rural Development fund of €69.75 billion before modulation.
Najmanj 33,01 milijard evrov bo razdeljenih med deset novih držav članic ter Romunijo in Bolgarijo, ki naj bi se priključili Evropski uniji 1. januarja 2007.
At least €33.01 billion will be shared between the ten New Member States, plus Romania and Bulgaria, which are expected to join the EU on 1 January 2007.
Preostalih 36.74 milijard evrov bo razdeljenih v okviru EU-25, s tem da bo najmanj polovica te vsote (18.91 milijard) zagotovljena državam EU-15.
The remaining €36.74 billion will be divided up among the EU-25, with at least half (€18.91 billion) being guaranteed for the EU-15.
1,35 milijarde evrov za Avstrijo, 460 milijonov evrov za Finsko, 500 milijonov evrov za Irsko, 500 milijonov evrov za Italijo, 20 milijonov evrov za Luksemburg, 111 milijonov evrov za Francijo, 820 milijonov evrov za Švedsko in 320 milijonov evrov za Portugalsko.
Within this total, some €4.07 billion will be allocated to national envelopes for certain countries - i.e. €1.35 billion to Austria, €460m to Finland, €500m to Ireland, 500m to Italy, €20m to Luxembourg, €111m to France, €820m to Sweden and €320m to Portugal.
Svet je odločil, da za Portugalsko ne veljajo pogoji o nacionalnem sofinanciranju, zaradi specifičnih težav portugalskega kmetijstva, opisanih v poročilu Komisije 10859/03.
In Portugal’s case, the Council concluded that the money should not be subject to co-financing, making reference to the particular constraints that Portuguese agriculture faces, as described in Commission's report 10859/03.
Celoten znesek, namenjen razvoju podeželja, je veliko manjši, kot je na začetku v finančnem načrtu predlagala Komisija .
The total amounts for rural development have been agreed on a considerably lower level compared to the initial Commission proposal for the Financial Perspectives.
Predlog Evropske komisije
European Commission's Proposal
Predlog Evropske komisije KOM (2006) 237 v skladu s finančnim sporazumom Sveta iz decembra 2005 predlaga, da se Portugalska izvzame iz uporabe zahteve o sofinanciranju za znesek 320 milijonov evrov.
The European Commission's proposal COM (2006) 237 proposes, in line with the December 2005 Financial Council Agreement, to exempt Portugal from the application of the co-financing requirement for the amount of EUR 320 million.
Predlog Komisije KOM (2006) 237, ki spreminja Uredbo (ES) št. 1698/2005, je potreben, da bi določbo o limitiranju uskladili z dogovorom Evropskega sveta iz decembra 2005 in tudi z ustrezno določbo v zakonodaji Skupnosti, ki ureja Strukturne sklade in Kohezijski sklad za obdobje 2007–2013.
Commission proposal COM (2006) 237, amending Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005, is necessary in order to bring the "capping provision" in line with the December 2005 European Council Agreement as well as with the relevant provision in the Community legislation governing the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund for the period 2007–2013.
Limitiranje pomeni največjo skupno porabo iz vseh strukturnih in razvojnih skladov v določeni državi članici, v odstotkih BDP.
Capping means the maximum total spending of all structural and rural development funds in a particular Member State, as a percentage of its GDP.
Ker je Svet skupno vsoto skladov na evropski ravni določil mnogo nižje, kot je prvotno predlagala Komisija, morajo biti določbe limitiranja v ustrezni zakonodaji primerno spremenjene.
As the total amount of funds at a European level has been agreed by the Council on a much lower level, as compared to the initial Commission proposal, the capping provisions in the corresponding legislation have to be altered accordingly.
Predlog pripravljavca mnenja
Draftsman Position
Pripravljavec mnenja predlaga, naj se izjemoma sprejme predlog, da se Portugalska izvzame iz uporabe zahteve sofinanciranja za znesek 320 milijonov EUR.
Your draftsman proposes to exceptionally accept the proposal to exempt Portugal from the application of the co-financing requirement for the amount of EUR 320 million assuming that this concerns a once-off operation.
Predlagane spremembe določb limitiranja so bolj tehnične narave.
The proposed changes to the capping provisions seem to be rather technical amendments.
Pripravljavec mnenja razume potrebo po ponovnem usklajevanju zakonodaje na področju razvoja podeželja z dogovorom Evropskega sveta iz decembra 2005.
The draftsman understands the need to realign rural development legislation with the December 2005 European Council Agreement.
Kljub temu pa bi morale proračunske spremembe slediti zakonodajnim odločitvam in ne obratno.
However, budgetary decisions should normally follow legislative decisions and not the other way around.
Poleg tega je zelo neprimerno, da se z vključevanjem določene dodatne preferencialne obravnave (tako imenovana božična darila) posamezne države članice prepričuje, naj glasujejo za sporazum.
Moreover, the practice by which individual Member States are being persuaded to vote in favour of an agreement, by including particular extra amounts or preferential treatment for them (the so called Christmas gifts) is highly undesirable.
Tovrstno prekupčevanje bi moralo biti preprečeno tudi zaradi preglednosti, enotnosti in zdravega finančnega upravljanja.
Also for reasons of transparency, unity and sound financial management the practice of this kind of horse treading should be prevented.
Pripravljavec mnenja se zavzema za sofinanciranje vseh plačil, namenjenih razvoju podeželja, kot tudi za neposredno dohodkovno podporo kmetom v okviru prvega stebra skupne evropske kmetijske politike, kar se zaenkrat še ne izvaja.
Your draftsman would favour co-financing of all rural development payments, as well as of direct income support given to farmers under the 1st Pillar of the European Common Agricultural Policy, which is not yet currently the case.
Sofinanciranje evropskih skladov zagotavlja, da si države članice bolj prizadevajo za ustrezno uporabo in nadzor sredstev.
Co-financing of European funds makes Member States more diligent in ensuring that those funds are well spent and well controlled.
Poleg tega bi sofinanciranje neposrednih plačil v okviru prvega stebra zmanjšalo pritisk na evropski proračun.
Moreover, co-financing of direct payments under the 1st Pillar would ease the current pressure on the European budget.
Nadalje pripravljavec mnenja nasprotuje trenutni porazdelitvi sredstev za razvoj podeželja med države članice.
Furthermore, the draftsman objects to the current manner in which rural development funds are divided between the Member States.
V povezavi z načelom enakosti meni, da bi morala biti ta sredstva razdeljena na podlagi objektivnih meril, kot del sistema, temelječega na potrebah, in ne na podlagi zgodovinske delitve, vključno z darili Sveta in predlagano prostovoljno modulacijo držav članic.
In relation to the equality principle, he believes that those funds should be divided on the basis of objective criteria as part of a "needs-based" system, instead of historic division keys, as well as Council gifts and the proposed voluntary modulation by Member States.
Predlog Uredbe Sveta, ki spreminja Uredbo (ES) št. 1698/2005 o podpori za razvoj podeželja iz Evropskega kmetijskega sklada za razvoj podeželja (EAFRD)
Proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)
o predlogu Uredbe Sveta o glukozi in laktozi (kodificirana različica)
on the proposal for a Council regulation on glucose and lactose (Codified version)
(Postopek posvetovanja)
(Consultation procedure - Codification)
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Svetu ( KOM(2006)0116 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council ( COM(2006)0116 )
– ob upoštevanju člena 308 pogodbe ES, v skladu s katerim se je Svet posvetoval s Parlamentom ( C6‑0135/2006 ),
– having regard to Article 308 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament ( C6‑0135/2006 ),
– ob upoštevanju poročila Odbora za pravne zadeve ( A6–0320/2006 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A6‑0320/2006 ),
Predlog Uredbe Sveta o glukozi in laktozi (kodificirana različica)
Proposal for a Council regulation on glucose and lactose (Codified version)
o predlogu direktive Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o pravici dajanja v najem in pravici posojanja ter o določenih pravicah, sorodnih avtorski pravici, na področju intelektualne lastnine (Kodificirana različica)
on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property (Codified version)
(Postopek soodločanja – kodifikacija)
(Codecision procedure - Codification)
– ob upoštevanju predloga Komisije Evropskemu parlamentu in Svetu ( KOM(2006)0226 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council ( COM(2006)0226 )
– ob upoštevanju člena 251(2) ter členov 47(2), 55 in 95 Pogodbe ES, v skladu s katerimi je Komisija predložila predlog Parlamentu ( C6‑0162/2006 ),
– having regard to Article 251(2) and Articles 47(2), 55 and 95 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament ( C6‑0162/2006 ),